delete_userPermanently delete a user profile and disconnect all linked social accounts. Removes the user and their social connections from the system.
Permanently delete a profile and disconnect its socials.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| username | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.11.1Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The destructiveHint annotation is present, but the description adds meaningful behavior beyond it: deletion is permanent and also disconnects the profile's connected social accounts. This gives the agent a clearer picture of the side effects without relying on annotation defaults.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that contains no filler. Every word contributes: 'permanently' communicates irreversibility, 'delete a profile' states the purpose, and 'disconnect its socials' describes an important side effect.
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 one-parameter destructive tool with an output schema, the description communicates the core action, irreversibility, and the social-disconnect side effect. It does not mention cascading data deletion or authorization requirements, but the tool is simple enough that this is still nearly complete.
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 for underdocumented parameters. It does not explain what 'username' refers to or what constraints or formats apply, leaving the agent with only the parameter name to infer meaning.
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 states a specific action ('permanently delete') on a clear resource ('profile') and adds a distinguishing side effect ('disconnect its socials'). It is easily distinguished from siblings like delete_comment, unpublish_post, and delete_media_upload.
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 does not say when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any preconditions for deleting a user. When it should be used is only inferred from the tool name and purpose statement.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.