ncloud_delete_metrics_group_force

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds 'irreversible' and 'ALL event rules', which are useful but do not contradict annotations. However, it lacks details on required permissions or side effects on the metrics group itself.

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 a single sentence with a warning symbol. It is concise, front-loads critical information (destructive, irreversible), and contains 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?

For a destructive tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete but lacks prerequisites (e.g., needing the metrics group ID) and does not clarify whether the metrics group itself is affected. Additional context on return behavior would improve completeness.

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 does not need to elaborate on parameters. It adds no additional meaning beyond the schema definitions. The 'confirm' parameter is described in the schema but not reinforced in the description.

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 verb ('Force delete') and the resource ('ALL event rules associated with a specific rule template (metrics group)'). It distinguishes from siblings like ncloud_delete_metrics_group by specifying it deletes associated rules, not the group itself. The term 'Force' adds specificity.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ncloud_delete_metrics_group). It only mentions destructiveness and irreversibility but does not clarify conditions or exclusions.

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