delete_firewall_policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete a firewall policy' and does not mention that deletion is irreversible, what permissions are needed, whether associated rules are affected, or any side effects. This is a meaningful gap for a destructive operation.

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: one clear purpose sentence followed by terse parameter guidance. There is no filler or repetition of schema field names without added 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?

Given the tool's low complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential calling details: what to delete, how to address host/site, and where to get the required policy_id. It is slightly incomplete only in that it omits any behavioral caution for a destructive action, but the core invocation context is present.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: host is documented as console name, ID, or composite ID in MAC:numericId format; site as name or ID; and policy_id as required and sourced from list_firewall_policies. This adds real meaning beyond the bare string fields in the input 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a firewall policy.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_firewall_policy, get_firewall_policy, update_firewall_policy, and patch_firewall_policy without needing to inspect their schemas.

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?

It gives context by explaining that policy_id must be obtained from list_firewall_policies via its id field, which tells the agent the prerequisite step. It does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or list alternatives, but the use case is clear enough for a simple delete operation.

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