github_packages_delete_package_for_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic destructive action, omitting details on success/error responses, reversibility (restore tools exist among siblings), or authentication requirements. This is insufficient for safe usage.

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 a single concise sentence, but it is overly minimal. While appropriately sized, it could include more detail without becoming verbose, earning a middling score.

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 simple delete operation, the description lacks completeness. It fails to mention return values, permissions, or the existence of restore operations, which are relevant for the agent to use the tool correctly without supplementary knowledge.

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 input schema provides only tautological descriptions ('username', 'package_type', 'package_name'), and the tool description adds no further meaning. It does not explain valid values for 'package_type' or format for 'package_name', leaving the agent without clarity.

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 'Delete a package for a user' clearly states the action (delete), resource (package), and scope (for a user). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete_package_for_org' or 'delete_package_for_authenticated_user'.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to delete for an org vs a user. It does not mention prerequisites like permissions or package existence, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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