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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses the auth requirement (signed-in session), the two hard preconditions that cause refusal, and the destructive blast radius (removal from every workspace, session and API key revocation, account anonymisation). It also states a recovery-adjacent fact many tools omit — the email can register again.

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?

Three tight sentences, no filler, with the access precondition front-loaded, the refusal conditions second, and the consequences last — a sensible priority order for an agent deciding whether it may call this at all.

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?

No output schema and no annotations exist, so the description must cover safety, preconditions and effects itself, and it does. For a single-parameter self-delete tool, an agent has everything it needs to decide whether the call will succeed and what it will cost.

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?

One parameter at 100% schema coverage, so the schema already defines 'password' and its purpose. The description's 'after confirming your password' adds the confirmation semantics but no format or constraint detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 and resource ('delete your own SAGOT account') and immediately constrains it to self-service via 'Signed-in session only', which separates it from admin-facing siblings like platform_accounts_suspend and workspaces_delete.

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?

Explicit when/when-not: only for your own account, requires password confirmation, and refused while you own a workspace or hold a staff role. It even names the alternative path ('transfer ownership or delete it first'), routing the agent to members_transfer or workspaces_delete instead.

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