delete_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it declares the operation irreversible and discloses a dry-run/preview default via confirm. It omits permission requirements and downstream effects (e.g., what happens to the user's signups or messages), which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three terse sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the irreversibility warning, then the confirm nuance. Every sentence earns its place and there is zero filler.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential facts an agent needs: what it destroys, that it cannot be undone, and how to preview first. Only auth/permission expectations and side effects on related data are missing.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it explains the critical semantic of confirm (absence = preview only), which the schema's bare boolean does not convey. user_id is left implicit but is self-evident; the key non-obvious parameter is covered.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Supprime un membre du club'), making it immediately distinguishable from sibling delete tools like delete_signup or delete_event. It does not name siblings explicitly, but the resource scope is unambiguous, so 4 is appropriate.

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 conveys an important mode condition ('Sans confirm=true : aperçu seulement'), which tells the agent the tool is safe to call without confirm. However, it gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., removing a signup vs. a user) or any prerequisites, so usage is only implied.

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