ncloud_mailer_delete_address_book

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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true, but the description goes beyond that by disclosing that the operation deletes the entire book, resets it, and cannot be undone. It also warns with a ⚠️ symbol and specifies that confirm=true is required to execute. This adds meaningful behavioral context without contradicting the 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 compact and efficiently organized: legacy context first, then destructive warning, then alternative tools, then the execution requirement. Every segment earns its place and provides information an agent needs before invoking a destructive operation.

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 no required params and full schema coverage, the description is complete. It explains the legacy status, the destructive scope, irreversibility, alternatives, and the confirmation parameter. No critical calling information is missing.

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%, and the schema already clearly documents both parameters: region (enum with path segment explanation) and confirm (must be true to execute). The description reinforces 'Set confirm=true to execute' but adds no substantive parameter meaning beyond the schema. 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Delete the ENTIRE address book' and explicitly defines the scope as 'every recipient group and every address.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tools ncloud_mailer_delete_addresses and ncloud_mailer_delete_recipient_group by stating what it does NOT do.

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 guidance: legacy Cloud Outbound Mailer only, migrated projects only, and a ~12-month window. It names the newer replacement tools (ncloud_sens_send_mail / ncloud_sens_list_mail_requests) and the partial-deletion alternatives (ncloud_mailer_delete_addresses / ncloud_mailer_delete_recipient_group). It also states the required confirm=true execution step.

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