Delete role

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the critical two-phase behavior: the first call returns a preview and confirm_token without deleting, and deletion only occurs on the second call with the token. It also clarifies side effects ('Members holding it simply lose it; nothing else changes'), providing detailed behavioral transparency that is essential for safe invocation.

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 concise, comprising three sentences that each add critical information: the action, the side effects, and the safe two-step process. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and avoids unnecessary verbosity, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

The description effectively explains the most important non-obvious behavior (the gated deletion flow) and the impact on role members. It does not detail the preview content or error conditions, and no output schema exists, but the core decision-making context is covered. Some information about permissions or edge cases is missing, but overall it is adequate for the tool's 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?

With only 40% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by explaining the role of confirm_token in the deletion flow. However, it does not clarify the dry_run parameter or the exact semantics of reason, leaving gaps for agents attempting to construct correct calls. The description adds some context but not enough to fully cover the low schema coverage.

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 opens with 'Delete a role', a specific verb+resource that clearly states the tool's purpose. It further distinguishes this tool from a simple delete by explaining the two-step confirm_token gating mechanism, which sets it apart from sibling tools like remove_role.

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 explicitly advises 'Safe to call directly' and recommends 'Prefer this gated flow over telling the user to delete the role manually.' This gives clear usage context and a preference over manual deletion. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like remove_role or update_role, leaving a small gap in alternative differentiation.

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