delete_static_route

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

The description discloses irreversibility and immediate traffic fallback, which goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation. It also describes return values (confirmation string or error) and audit logging. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured: a clear headline, behavioral notes, then a labeled argument list. It is concise yet comprehensive, with no unnecessary information.

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?

The description covers prerequisites, side effects, error cases, return values, audit logging, and parameter sources. Given the tool's destructive nature and the presence of an output schema, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use it safely.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description provides full parameter semantics: tier1_id is the gateway from list functions, route_id from list_static_routes, gateway_type options with default, and target defaults. This fully compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states it deletes a static route from a Tier-0 or Tier-1 gateway. The '[WRITE]' prefix and mention of 'permanently delete' make the action clear. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_static_route and list_static_routes.

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 advises running list_static_routes first to confirm the route_id and recommends user confirmation. It also specifies the gateway type and target parameter usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., if the route is critical).

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