ncloud_delete_mysql_server

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

The description adds the confirm=true requirement and the master/standby restriction, which are not fully covered by the destructiveHint annotation. It also opens with a ⚠️ Destructive warning, reinforcing the safety profile. No contradiction with annotations.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences. The warning appears first, followed by the action and the key constraints. Every sentence conveys essential information without unnecessary detail.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical aspects: what is deleted, what cannot be deleted, and the confirm flag. It missing potential details like cluster impact or error states, but given the simplicity and schema coverage, it is sufficiently complete.

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 already documents all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description repeats the confirm=true behavior and the slave/recovery restriction but does not add new meaning beyond the schema, such as regionCode usage.

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 action (Delete), the resource (Slave or Recovery server instance), and the scope (from a Cloud DB for MySQL cluster). It explicitly excludes Master/Standby, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_delete_mysql_instance.

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 gives explicit when-to-use (delete Slave or Recovery) and when-not-to-use (Master/Standby cannot be deleted). It also provides the execution condition 'Set confirm=true to execute', giving clear operational guidance.

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