delete_indexerproxy_by_id

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond restating the DELETE operation, such as what happens if the ID is not found, whether related data is affected, or any authorization requirements.

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 compact and front-loaded: 'Delete IndexerProxy.' followed by the endpoint and argument. It contains no filler, though the title sentence and HTTP method are somewhat redundant.

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 one-parameter delete operation, the description is mostly complete. The output schema is present, annotations cover the destructive and idempotent behavior, and the endpoint template clarifies how to invoke the tool. It lacks a bit of context about effects and error cases, but the low complexity makes this acceptable.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It identifies the single parameter as a path parameter and shows its placement in the endpoint URL, which adds useful context beyond the schema. However, it does not explain what the ID refers to beyond the resource name already given.

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 clearly states 'Delete IndexerProxy' with the HTTP DELETE endpoint, making the verb and resource explicit. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_indexerproxy_by_id and update_indexerproxy_by_id by specifying the delete operation.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and the 'Delete IndexerProxy' statement: use this when you want to remove a specific IndexerProxy by its ID. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or how it relates to alternatives such as bulk deletion or update operations.

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