ecp_postgres_delete_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing destructive behavior. It warns that the operation is 'Irreversible,' which is a meaningful behavioral trait, but it does not mention side effects, dependency failures, or the required confirm flag.

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 carry the essential message: the action and its irreversibility. There is no filler, and the key warning is 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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits the confirm requirement, any usage context, and potential consequences beyond irreversibility, leaving an agent underinformed.

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% and the description provides no information about db_username or confirm. The description must compensate for the undocumented schema, but it does not explain either parameter or the confirmation requirement.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('Postgres user'), clearly identifying the operation and engine. It is distinct from siblings like ecp_postgres_delete_database and the MySQL/Mongo/MSSQL delete-user tools, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as revoking privileges or disabling a user. Prerequisites (e.g., ensuring the user owns no objects) are also absent.

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