delete_collector

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly warns that the action is irreversible and that all sources on the collector will be deleted, which are the key side effects. It does not mention permissions, rate limits, or error handling, but the most critical behavioral traits are transparently disclosed.

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?

The description is extremely concise: two short sentences. The first sentence states the action and scope, and the second delivers a critical warning. Every word earns its place, and the information is front-loaded with the primary purpose. No filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

For a simple delete tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what is deleted, the cascade effect, and the irreversibility. It does not explain return values (handled by the output schema) or mention prerequisites like permissions, but given the tool's simplicity, the description is sufficiently complete.

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 description coverage is 100%; the parameter collector_id is already described as "Collector ID to delete." The description does not add direct parameter-level details (e.g., format, allowed values), but it does clarify that deleting the collector also deletes the sources attached to that collector, which indirectly adds semantic context. However, since the schema already covers the parameter, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: "Delete a collector and all its sources." This clearly states the action, the target (collector), and the scope (including sources). It distinguishes from siblings like delete_monitor and update_collector by specifying the collector-focused destructive behavior.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool (to delete a collector) and includes a warning about irreversibility and the cascade deletion of sources, which helps the agent understand the consequences. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is so specific that usage is unambiguous.

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