github_code_security_delete_configuration_for_enterprise

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action, with no mention of effects (e.g., irreversibility), required permissions, or any impact on linked repositories. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the consequences of invoking this tool.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence that captures the core action. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary words. However, it may be too brief to be fully helpful without additional context.

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?

Given the tool's two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a code security configuration is, that deletion is typically irreversible, or provide any context about the enterprise scope. The agent lacks sufficient information to safely use this tool.

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?

Both parameters are documented in the schema with only their names as descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context about these parameters, such as the format of enterprise identifier or how to obtain the configuration_id. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description provides no extra value.

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 verb 'Delete', resource 'code security configuration', and scope 'for an enterprise'. The tool name and description together make the purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from sibling tools like 'github_code_security_delete_configuration' which operates at a different level.

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 vs alternatives. For example, there is a sibling tool named 'github_code_security_delete_configuration' that may operate at the organization level, but the description does not clarify the distinction or provide any context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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