delete_address_group

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description is consistent with both. Beyond the annotations, it adds genuinely useful behavior: the deletion is staged in candidate config and requires commit to take effect. This is a non-obvious behavioral trait that changes agent expectations about the call's immediate impact.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the [MODIFIES CONFIG] tag first, followed by the action, then the essential staging caveat. Every word earns its place; there is zero filler or redundancy.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical workflow fact — the deletion is staged and requires commit. Minor gaps remain: no mention of behavior when the group does not exist or is referenced by other configuration, and no expectation of what the call returns.

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% — both 'name' and 'firewall' are already documented in the input schema. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource — 'Deletes an address group' — with a '[MODIFIES CONFIG]' tag that flags the operation type. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_address_object (address objects) and add_address_group (the inverse operation), so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 'requires commit to activate' note provides clear operational context: deletion is staged, so the agent should follow up with the commit tool. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance versus alternatives such as delete_address_object, nor any mention of verifying with get_address_groups.

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