timeweb_delete_app

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the 'permanently' aspect, which is a critical behavioral trait for a destructive operation. However, it does not mention any additional consequences (e.g., impact on associated resources, irreversibility beyond 'permanent', or required permissions). This is a basic warning but not rich contextual detail.

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 contains no filler words. It is front-loaded with the essential information, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 delete operation with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states the action and permanence. Minor gaps include not mentioning the success response or error behavior, but given the simplicity of the tool and absence of an output schema, it is sufficiently 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (app_id, format) having descriptive text. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the schema's completeness. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 deletes a PaaS application permanently, using a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('PaaS application'). This distinguishes it from sibling delete tools targeting other resource types (e.g., servers, databases, firewall groups).

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 context is clear: use this tool to delete a PaaS application. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but for a delete operation the usage is straightforward. No exclusions are noted, so a 'clear context with no exclusions' score of 4 fits.

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