aircall_delete_user

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds valuable context with 'This action cannot be undone,' reinforcing irreversibility. This goes beyond the metadata, though it does not elaborate on other behaviors like permissions or cascading effects.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with zero unnecessary words. It states the action and an important caveat, making it highly efficient and easy to scan.

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 one-parameter delete operation with strong annotations and a clear destructive warning, the description is complete. It covers the essential action and consequence without needing additional detail; no output schema is present, but none is expected for a delete 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% and the single parameter (user_id) already has a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete a user from Aircall') with a specific verb and resource. The phrase 'from Aircall' clarifies that it removes the user account itself, distinguishing it from sibling tools like aircall_remove_user_from_team.

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 implies usage for permanently deleting a user but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., aircall_remove_user_from_team for team removal). There is no when-to-use or exclusion context beyond the core action.

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