supabase_auth_delete_user

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond what the annotations provide, such as irreversibility, cascading effects, or required admin permissions. For a destructive operation, this lack of additional disclosure is a significant gap.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose. There is no wasted verbiage, and the essential information 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 simple 1-parameter delete operation, the description combined with the schema and annotations provides adequate context. The destructiveHint annotation covers the risk profile, and the parameter is fully documented. It would benefit from a mention of irreversibility, but overall completeness is sufficient for the tool's low complexity.

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 already fully describes the only parameter (userId) with 'User ID (UUID) to delete', providing 100% schema description coverage. The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, but it is consistent with the parameter's documented purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 user by their ID' clearly states the action (delete), the resource (user), and the key parameter (ID). It is specific and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like supabase_delete (which deletes table rows) and supabase_auth_update_user (which updates rather than deletes).

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. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where supabase_delete or other auth tools might be more appropriate. Usage is only implied by the tool name and sibling context.

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