Delete a device name

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-read-only; the description adds meaningful context by noting it 'may notify recipients or change tenant data' and requires an operator write opt-in. It also flags an upstream API documentation error, which is valuable beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, resource, and endpoint. The correction about the official definition and cURL typo is dense but purposeful because it prevents an agent from using a wrong URL. Some redundancy exists, but most sentences earn their place.

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 one-resource DELETE with no output schema, it covers the endpoint, required confirmation, side effects, and a known documentation discrepancy. It does not describe response or error formatting, but that is not essential for this mutation.

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 67%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds 'Body fields: none' and confirms the confirm:true requirement, but it does not meaningfully expand on path.deviceID or query beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States the exact action and resource: 'Delete a device name', and anchors it to the correct endpoint /api/xm/1/device-names/{deviceID}. It also explicitly separates this from deleting a device by naming the resource type, making sibling differentiation clear.

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?

Provides explicit preconditions for use: operator write opt-in and confirm:true, plus a warning about side effects. It does not name alternative tools, but the sibling set and resource name make the intended use case obvious.

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