ncloud_sourcedeploy_delete_project

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explicitly listing what will be removed ('All stages, scenarios, and history') and adding the safety mechanism 'Set confirm=true to execute.' This provides specific behavioral context about consequences and execution requirements that the annotations alone do not convey.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with a clear warning, then states the action, its consequences, and the required execution flag. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description fully covers what the tool does, what it destroys, and how to execute it. The destructive and idempotent annotations complement the description, and the safety flag is clearly documented. No significant gaps remain.

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%, with both projectId and confirm already described in the schema. The description reinforces that confirm must be true to execute, but this duplicates the schema's own description and adds no new semantic information beyond what the structured fields provide.

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: 'Permanently delete a SourceDeploy project.' It specifies the resource and the verb, and distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_stage or delete_scenario by noting the project-level scope and that all stages, scenarios, and history will be removed.

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 clear context that this is a project-level destructive operation, implying it should be used when deleting the entire project rather than individual stages or scenarios. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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