delete_tag

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds a critical non-obvious behavior: the deletion is staged in candidate config and requires 'commit' to activate. This qualifies the destructive nature and prevents the agent from assuming the change is immediately live.

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 sentence with the config-modification warning front-loaded and the essential commit requirement included. Every word earns its place; no 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 delete operation with full schema coverage and appropriate annotations, the description covers the critical behavioral nuance of staging and commit. No output schema is present, and none is needed for this straightforward operation.

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 coverage is 100%, so both 'name' and 'firewall' are already documented with descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level semantics, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Deletes'), a specific resource ('tag object'), and the config-staging context. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_tag, get_tags, and 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 doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but it gives clear operational context: the deletion is staged and only activates after commit. This tells an agent how and when the change takes effect, though it stops short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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