edubase_delete_organization

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

Annotations already disclose destructiveHint and readOnlyHint, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds the behavioral requirement to confirm with the user first, but it does not disclose what happens to dependent data, whether deletion is reversible, or what side effects may occur. It contradicts no annotation.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the core purpose and a critical confirmation requirement with no filler. The structure is minimal and appropriately front-loaded.

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 one-parameter delete operation with complete schema coverage and annotations indicating destructive behavior, the definition covers the essential invocation details. The only notable gap is the absence of any statement about cascading consequences or what specifically happens to associated organization data, but the confirmation instruction mitigates the risk.

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?

The single parameter 'organization' has full schema description coverage as 'organization identification string,' so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Remove an organization.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that delete subresources such as organization departments, members, or webhooks. Even though the first phrase repeats the annotation title, the intent is unambiguous.

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 instruction to 'Confirm with the user first' is useful operational guidance for a destructive action, but the description does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like deleting an organization department or member. Tool selection must be inferred primarily from the resource name rather than from explicit usage guidance.

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