ncloud_drm_delete_policy

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description discloses that deletion is permanent, that sites using the policy must be disabled first, and that confirm=true is required. These behavioral details materially inform the agent about safety requirements and consequences, going beyond what the structured annotations provide.

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?

Three short sentences deliver a warning, the action, a prerequisite, and the confirmation requirement. Every sentence earns its place; there is no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 two-parameter tool with safety annotations, the description covers the action, irreversibility, prerequisite, and execution gate. The absence of an output schema does not create a gap for this simple delete operation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents policyId and confirm. The description restates the confirm requirement but adds no deeper semantic detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with 'Permanently delete a DRM policy,' using a specific verb and resource with a permanence qualifier. This clearly distinguishes the tool from DRM get/update/disable operations, and no sibling tool competes for the same delete-policy action.

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 provides an explicit prerequisite ('Disable any site using this policy first') and an execution gate ('Set confirm=true to execute'). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives such as update_policy or disable_site, but the context is sufficient for an agent to know when this destructive action is appropriate.

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