pve_delete_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete a user' implies a destructive, irreversible mutation, but it doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: no mention of required permissions, whether deletion is immediate or queued, what happens to associated resources (VMs, containers, etc.), or error conditions. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is dangerously inadequate.

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 concise at just two words, which could be considered appropriately sized for such a simple statement. However, given the tool's destructive nature and the complete lack of behavioral context, this brevity borders on under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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 destructive deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'delete' means operationally, what the consequences are, what permissions are required, or what the tool returns. The agent has no way to understand the behavioral implications of invoking this tool beyond the basic fact that it deletes users.

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 has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'userid' clearly documented as 'User ID (format: user@realm)'. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema. According to the scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.

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' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (user), which is specific enough to understand the basic purpose. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'pve_delete_group' or 'pve_delete_role' - all follow the same 'delete X' pattern without indicating what makes user deletion unique.

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 absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (like checking if the user exists first), consequences (what happens to the user's resources), or when NOT to use it. Given the destructive nature of deletion, this is a critical omission.

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