appwrite_delete_user

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses irreversibility ('This action is irreversible'), but omits other critical behaviors like whether associated sessions/data are cascade-deleted or if the user_id can be reused.

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?

Brief two-sentence structure is efficient, but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be implementation metadata that doesn't help the agent understand the tool's function.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description should explain the parameter meanings and deletion scope. Currently incomplete with undocumented parameters and no mention of success/failure indicators.

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 has 0% description coverage with two undocumented parameters ('site' and 'user_id'). Description fails to compensate by explaining what 'site' refers to (project/tenant?) or the expected format for 'user_id'.

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 specific verb 'Delete' and resource 'user', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like appwrite_delete_user_session (which targets sessions). However, it doesn't explicitly scope this to AppWrite projects beyond the tool name prefix.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., appwrite_update_user_status to deactivate instead of permanently delete) or prerequisites needed before deletion.

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