timeweb_delete_image

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the permanent, destructive nature of the operation (which is the most critical trait), but does not mention potential side effects such as whether servers using the image are affected or if the deletion is immediate. Still, it provides the essential warning that the action is irreversible.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action, resource, and key qualifier. There is no redundant information or unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place.

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 2-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description provides the essential context: what it does (delete), what it acts on (custom OS image), and the permanent consequence. It does not explain return values or error conditions, but these are typically standard for delete operations. The description is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's primary behavior.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters (image_id and format). The description adds no additional parameter semantics. According to the baseline rule for full schema coverage, a 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 uses a specific verb ('Delete'), names the resource ('custom OS image'), and adds a critical qualifier ('permanently') that clarifies scope. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like timeweb_list_images, timeweb_get_image, timeweb_create_image, and timeweb_update_image, as well as other delete_* tools.

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 implicitly provides clear context: use this when you need to delete a custom OS image. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource is unambiguous and the tool's name aligns with its description. Since there are many sibling delete tools, this single-sentence purpose statement is sufficient for an agent to select it correctly.

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