startup_script_delete_startup_script

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive action ('Delete'), the identifier resolution behavior, and the return type. However, it doesn't mention permanence, failure behavior, or whether scripts referenced by instances can be deleted, leaving some important behavioral traits unspecified.

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 brief and well-structured, with the main action front-loaded and separate sections for identifier resolution, arguments, and returns. Every sentence adds value; no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 deletion tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential calling context. Minor gaps remain: no mention of edge cases like deleting boot/PXE scripts or behavior when the script is attached to an instance. Still, it is sufficiently complete for straightforward use.

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 only specifies a string for script_identifier, but the description compensates fully: it explains that parameter is a startup script name or ID and that smart identifier resolution accepts both. For a single parameter this is excellent documentation 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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('startup script'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like startup_script_list_startup_scripts, startup_script_get_startup_script, and startup_script_update_startup_script. The smart identifier resolution note adds useful scope without ambiguity.

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?

No explicit when-to-use vs alternatives is provided, but the purpose is obvious from the first sentence and tool name. It doesn't mention when to prefer list/get/create/update tools, nor prerequisites like ensuring the script is not in use. The identifier resolution note gives some usage context but doesn't cover exclusions.

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