prufa_delete_monitor

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Discloses idempotency, retention of past runs, and revocation of deploy hook. No annotation support available, so description carries burden; no contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise: 3 key points in 2 sentences. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers main behavioral aspects for a delete operation. Could mention undoability or permissions, but sufficient for simple tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%, but description adds no new parameter info beyond schema's idempotency_key description. The 'Idempotent' statement reduces redundancy but doesn't clarify monitor_id.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states 'Delete a monitor' and details effects: stops future runs, revokes deploy hook, retains history. Distinguishes from sibling tools like pause_monitor.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implied usage from 'Delete a monitor,' but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., pause_monitor) or prerequisites (e.g., [Pro] plan).

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.