delete_team

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

The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the deletion is permanent, reversible, or cascading to associated resources. Without annotations, this omission is critical for a destructive operation.

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 brief at three words, but it lacks necessary details. True conciseness would include essential context without verbosity; here it is under-specified.

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 destructive nature and one parameter, the description should indicate the effect, required permissions, and any limitations. It fails to address these, making it incomplete for reliable agent invocation.

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 defines a single required parameter 'team_id', but the description does not explain its purpose or format. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no additional meaning, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema.

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 team.' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (team), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create_team' and 'get_team'. However, it lacks any additional context about scope or side effects.

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, such as prerequisites like team membership or permissions. There is no mention of alternatives or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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