ncloud_sourcedeploy_delete_project

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description details the exact scope of deletion (project, stages, scenarios, history), giving full transparency. No contradiction with 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—two short sentences—with the warning and key instruction front-loaded. Every word adds value.

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?

The description adequately covers the destructive effect and the safeguard parameter. With no output schema, mentioning the irreversible nature is sufficient, though a brief note on success confirmation would be slightly better.

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?

The schema already fully describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description reinforces the confirm parameter's role but adds no new information beyond what is in the schema.

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 identifies the tool as permanently deleting a SourceDeploy project, specifying what is removed (stages, scenarios, history). This differentiates it from sibling tools that are mostly read or non-destructive operations.

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 explicitly states the requirement to set confirm=true to execute, providing clear usage guidance. While it doesn't mention alternatives, the destructive nature and safety check are well communicated.

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