Delete Environment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It adds a useful non-obvious rule—built-in Live/Latest cannot be deleted—but it does not state whether deletion is irreversible, whether it cascades, or what authorization is required. This is partial, not full, transparency.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the caveat is separated into its own focused sentence.

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?

Given that an output schema exists and all required parameters are documented in the schema, the remaining context is mostly satisfied. The built-in caveat is valuable; what's missing is an explicit statement of side effects or when to choose another environment operation, but this is a minor gap for a simple delete 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?

The input schema already describes all three parameters (account_id, container_id, environment_id) at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but none are necessary given the clear numeric IDs.

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 names the exact operation ('Delete') and resource ('container environment'), which immediately distinguishes it from sibling environment operations like create/update/list/get and from delete_container/delete_workspace. The built-in exception adds clarity rather than confusion.

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?

It clearly implies use when a custom environment should be removed and warns that Live/Latest are not eligible. However, it does not explicitly direct an agent to alternatives such as update_environment or reauthorize_environment, nor does it state preconditions like required permissions.

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