delete_proxmox_vm

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's 'Delete' is consistent. However, it adds no extra behavioral context such as whether the VM is permanently removed from disk, if confirmation is required, or what happens to associated resources. The dry_run parameter is mentioned in the schema but not in the description. The description is adequate but does not enhance understanding beyond 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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. It avoids unnecessary words, though it could include more context without being overly verbose.

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 (delete operation, no output schema) and full parameter schema coverage, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it does not mention that the deletion is permanent or irreversible (though destructiveHint covers this), nor does it address the presence of sibling tools like 'delete_proxmox_vm_preview'. More context would improve completeness.

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 has 100% coverage (all 6 parameters have descriptions). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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 tool's purpose: 'Delete a VM or container from Proxmox'. It uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('VM or container from Proxmox'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'clone_proxmox_vm', 'control_vm', or 'create_proxmox_vm'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'delete_proxmox_vm_preview' (which previews the deletion) or 'remove_vm'. There is no mention of prerequisites, side effects, or when not to use this tool.

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