Delete Version

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that deletion is reversible, implying a soft-delete model, and warns that the live version is protected from deletion. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the bare 'Delete' verb, though it does not address permissions or downstream effects.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the two behavioral caveats (reversibility and live-version restriction) are placed immediately after without wasted words.

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?

The description covers the essential operational constraints: what is deleted, that deletion is reversible, and the one prohibited case. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, and the parameter list is simple. Minor omissions such as prerequisites or permission requirements do not undermine usability.

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%, so the parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning beyond calling the entity a container version, which is sufficient given the high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a container version.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from the many other delete_* siblings by naming the target as a container version, and the title aligns with the action. No ambiguity remains about what the tool does.

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 usage context by noting that deletion is reversible via undelete_version and explicitly states the live version cannot be deleted. It names a relevant sibling tool, though it stops short of fully enumerating alternative tools or conditions for when deletion should be chosen.

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