delete_static_route

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states that this is a delete but says nothing about irreversibility, whether a confirmation is required, permission needs, or what happens on an invalid seq_num.

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?

One sentence, zero filler, and the identifying selector is front-loaded. Nothing is wasted.

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 two-parameter delete with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate but thin. With no annotations to carry the destructive-operation profile, the missing disclosure of irreversibility and error behavior leaves a real gap.

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 both parameters are already documented. The description adds only the hint that seq_num originates from list_static_routes; it does not explain the VDOM parameter or validate constraints. Baseline 3 for full schema coverage applies.

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 a specific verb (Delete) and resource (static route) plus the exact selection criterion (sequence number). It is clearly distinguishable from its siblings list_static_routes and create_static_route.

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 parenthetical '(seq-num from list_static_routes)' implies an ordering workflow: list first, then delete by the returned identifier. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no warning about consequences.

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