timeweb_delete_server

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 explicitly states the deletion is permanent, which is a critical behavioral trait about irreversibility and destructiveness. While it could mention prerequisites or side effects, the permanence disclosure is significant and exceeds what the tool name alone conveys.

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 short sentence: 'Delete a cloud server permanently'. Every word carries meaning, with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the action verb and clearly states the resource, achieving maximum impact in minimal text.

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?

This is a simple delete tool with two parameters (one required), and the schema fully documents them. The description succinctly conveys the essential fact of permanent deletion. While it could elaborate on what happens to associated resources or billing, the basic context is sufficient for a straightforward delete operation, especially given the schema richness.

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% coverage: both 'server_id' and 'format' have descriptions. The tool description does not add anything beyond the schema about parameter meanings or usage. Since schema coverage is high, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate; the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Delete a cloud server permanently' clearly identifies the action (delete) and the resource (cloud server). The word 'permanently' emphasizes the destructive nature, distinguishing it from other operations like stopping or suspending a server. It is specific and unambiguous, clearly differentiating from sibling tools that delete other 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 provides no guidance on when this tool should be used, such as when a server is no longer needed, or mention of alternatives like server_action for non-destructive state changes. There is no 'use this for X, use that for Y' context, leaving the agent without explicit usage direction.

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