delete_account

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

Given there are no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that deletion is permanent and cites the HTTP DELETE method, indicating a destructive, non-reversible action. It also states where parameters go. However, it does not discuss permissions, side effects on related data, or error behavior, which would be expected for a destructive mutation with zero annotation coverage.

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 sentences with no filler. The primary action and permanence are front-loaded ('Permanently delete an account'), followed by the HTTP call and parameter placement. Every word adds value, and the structure is efficient and scannable.

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 an output schema present, the description is fairly complete. It covers the endpoint, permanence, and how to route parameters. It omits details like authentication requirements or what happens to associated resources, but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate. It would benefit from noting that deletion is irreversible or listing any required permissions, but these are minor.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does provide guidance: 'Put route IDs in path_params and filtering, pagination, sorting, or include values in query.' This clarifies the meaning of path_params (for IDs) and query (for filters/pagination/sorting), which is useful. However, the 'body' parameter is not mentioned at all, and the description does not detail value formats or examples, leaving a gap in full parameter semantics.

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 operation: 'Permanently delete an account,' identifying the verb (delete) and resource (account). It also specifies the HTTP method and endpoint, making the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools (e.g., delete_admin_user) by explicitly naming alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no warnings about destructive consequences beyond the word 'permanently.' It does not mention when not to use it or refer to any sibling tools, leaving usage context entirely implicit.

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