delete-rum-application

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

The description matches the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false) by stating 'Delete'. However, it adds no additional behavioral details such as whether deletion is irreversible, requires special permissions, or triggers side effects. With annotations already providing the destructive nature, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 of 6 words, perfectly front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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 simple destructive action with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could optionally note that deletion is irreversible, but the destructiveHint annotation already conveys that. The description does not repeat what's in structured fields, making it efficiently 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 single parameter 'id' is fully described in the schema as 'RUM application ID to delete'. The description's phrase 'by ID' adds no new meaning beyond the schema, which already achieves 100% coverage. 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 clearly states the verb (delete), resource (RUM application), and identifier method (by ID). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create-rum-application, update-rum-application, and get-rum-application, as well as other delete tools for different resources.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it warn about destructive consequences or prerequisites beyond the schema. Despite the destructiveHint annotation, the description does not explicitly state 'only use if you are sure' or compare with update-rum-application.

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