placetel_delete_webex_userDelete a Webex user by ID through the Placetel Web API. Use this destructive operation to remove a specific Webex user from the system.
Delete a Webex user. (DELETE /webex/users/{id}) Destructive.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Path parameter id. | |
| response_format | No | Output format: 'markdown' (human-readable, default) or 'json' (machine-readable). | markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so restating "Destructive" adds no information. The description does not say whether deletion is permanent or reversible, what happens to the user's licenses, numbers, or Webex workspace membership, or whether an error is returned for unknown ids.
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 short fragments, purpose front-loaded, endpoint and risk flag trailing. 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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the essentials (what tool does, that it is destructive) are present, but the agent gets no information on side effects, failure modes, or the id's origin. Adequate but with clear gaps.
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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about the id parameter, leaving ambiguity about whether it is the Webex user id or the PlacETel user id, and says nothing about response_format choice.
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 ("Delete a Webex user") and pins the underlying endpoint DELETE /webex/users/{id}, which distinguishes it from the sibling placetel_delete_user and placetel_delete_sip_user. No explicit sibling differentiation in prose, but the resource noun does the work.
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 on when to use this versus the other delete tools (user, sip user, contact) and no preconditions such as required permissions or what must be cleaned up first (licenses, numbers). The lone signal is the adjective "Destructive."
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.