ncloud_delete_asg

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context by highlighting the irreversible nature ('Permanently delete') and the confirm safety mechanism. It does not contradict 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 extremely concise—one line with a warning emoji and a critical instruction. Every word serves a purpose, and it is front-loaded with the most important information.

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 simple two-parameter tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects (destructive, confirm guard). It does not explain return values (not needed) or idempotency, but it is sufficiently complete for typical use.

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 description adds marginal value beyond schema. It reiterates the confirm requirement but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning.

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 'Permanently delete an Auto Scaling Group,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create, update, list, and detail operations for ASGs.

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 a safety instruction ('Set confirm=true to execute') but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., suspend processes or update before deletion). Usage context is implied but not fully addressed.

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