aap_delete_host

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

Beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, the description explicitly warns 'DESTRUCTIVE - requires confirmation' and explains confirmation_token as 'Token from first call', disclosing the two-step confirmation flow. This adds meaningful behavioral context that annotations alone do not convey, though it omits details like error handling or idempotency.

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 front-loaded with the action and a clear warning. The Args section is straightforward and every sentence serves a purpose. No unnecessary words or redundancy with the schema.

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 and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential operation and the confirmation flow. It does not discuss prerequisites, behavior when confirmation_token is omitted, or the distinction from similar delete tools, but these are not critical for a basic delete operation. The warning and token explanation make it adequately complete.

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 provides no descriptions for the parameters, but the description lists both host_id and confirmation_token. Crucially, it explains confirmation_token as 'Token from first call', which clarifies the two-step confirmation mechanism. host_id is only given a generic 'Host ID' label, which is thin, but the token semantics significantly enhance 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a host from an AAP inventory.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like aap_remove_host_from_group, which removes host-group membership rather than deleting the host.

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 implies usage context (deleting a host) but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternatives. For example, it does not clarify when to use aap_delete_host vs aap_remove_host_from_group. 'Requires confirmation' hints at a two-step flow but gives no strategic guidance.

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