akb_delete_vault

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It is explicit about what is deleted (documents, chunks, tables, files, edges, Git repo), that deletion is permanent, and that permission is restricted to owner/admin.

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 one tightly worded sentence that leads with the action and consequence, then lists the data scope and permission constraint. Every clause adds necessary information without filler.

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 an irreversible destructive operation with no output schema and no annotations, this description gives all critical details: what is deleted, that it cannot be undone, and who is allowed to invoke it. An agent can safely decide whether to call it.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable but not enriching, so the baseline of 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 opens with a strong verb and resource: "Permanently delete a vault." It then enumerates exactly what gets destroyed and emphasizes irreversibility, which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling akb_archive_vault.

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 clear usage context: use this only when you intend permanent destruction, and only as an owner or admin. It does not explicitly name a non-destructive alternative like akb_archive_vault, so it falls short of a 5.

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