snapshot_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavior. It explicitly warns 'This action cannot be undone', which is a critical irreversible destructive behavior, and it states the return type is a status message. It does not discuss permissions or failure cases, but the key safety property is 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 compact, well-organized, and free of filler. It uses an Args/Returns/Warning structure that is easy to scan, and every sentence adds useful information, including a practical example and an irreversible-action warning.

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-parameter delete tool with no annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential details: what to pass, the expected status return, and the irreversible nature. It doesn't mention edge cases like what happens when a snapshot ID does not exist, but the core calling contract is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 schema only says snapshot_id is a string, but the description adds real meaning: it accepts either a snapshot ID or a human-readable description, and gives concrete examples like 'backup-2024-01' or an UUID. This is helpful semantic guidance beyond the schema.

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 snapshot', making the operation unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from sibling snapshot_create, snapshot_create_from_url, and snapshot_update by the action and resource scope.

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 phrase 'Delete a snapshot' clearly conveys when this tool should be used: whenever a snapshot needs to be removed. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives such as snapshot_create or snapshot_update, but the delete-only scope and lack of exclusions give sufficient operational context.

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