sacloud-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a deletion operation (implying destructive behavior) but doesn't disclose critical details: whether deletion is permanent/reversible, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions. The return type mention adds minimal value.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args/Returns sections are structured but could be more integrated. No wasted sentences, though the parameter explanations are insufficient.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It misses behavioral details (permanence, side effects), parameter guidance, and error handling, leaving significant gaps for safe agent invocation.

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 only lists parameter names in Japanese without explaining their meaning, valid values, or format. For example, 'zone' and 'internet_id' lack context about what zones are available or how router IDs are obtained.

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 the tool's purpose: 'さくらのクラウドAPIでルータを削除します' (deletes a router using the Sakura Cloud API). It specifies the verb (削除/delete) and resource (ルータ/router), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_bridge' beyond the resource type.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While sibling tools include 'create_router' and 'get_router_list', the description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., router must exist), consequences, or when to choose deletion over other operations.

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