decommission_device

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

Annotations already show destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. Description adds valuable behavior: stops services, removes from clusters, deletes sitemap row, and mentions optional migration. It also references `force_removal` causing data loss. However, it does not address idempotency or error handling, and the term 'safely' may understate destructiveness.

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?

Two sentences: first explains the core action, second provides sibling differentiation. No unnecessary words, efficient and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the action and workflow. It mentions validation via validate_only and dry_run. However, it does not describe return values or prerequisites (e.g., device existence, permissions), which would be helpful for a destructive tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context by linking migration_plan to the optional migration step and explaining the role of force_removal. This enhances understanding beyond the schema, warranting a 4.

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?

Description clearly states the specific action: 'Safely remove a device from the network infrastructure' and details the steps (stops services, removes from clusters, optionally migrates, deletes sitemap row). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by comparing with `remove_device` and `purge_devices`, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool: 'Use `remove_device` for inventory-only deletion... use `purge_devices` for bulk... use `decommission_device` when host-side cleanup is required.' This provides clear decision guidance against alternatives.

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