environments_delete

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It correctly identifies the operation as destructive and highlights the need for a confirmation flag and environment variable. However, it lacks details about response, error scenarios, or idempotency.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence plus a note. Front-loaded with the method and purpose. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given no output schema and a simple delete operation, the description is decent but could be more complete. It explains prerequisites but does not cover return values, error handling, or side effects. For a destructive tool with 4 required params, more context would help.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter information beyond what the schema already provides. The schema itself documents all four parameters adequately.

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 it deletes a GTM environment, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like environments_create, environments_get, etc. The '[DELETE]' prefix further clarifies the HTTP method.

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 description explicitly lists required conditions: GTM_MCP_ENABLE_DELETES=true and confirm=true. This tells the agent prerequisites for using the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives.

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