superset_user_delete

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. It successfully warns about irreversibility, server lockout, and dashboard access changes. However, it incorrectly states that confirm_delete is 'REQUIRED' while the schema contradicts this by marking it optional with a default of false. This schema-contradiction detracts from full transparency.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose, a CRITICAL warning section, and a simple Args list. It is concise and front-loaded with the essential action. The only structural flaw is the redundant and incorrect 'REQUIRED' note on confirm_delete, which adds noise.

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 that this is a delete operation with severe consequences, the description covers the most critical side effects: irreversibility, service-account lockout, and dashboard access changes. An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed. However, it omits other potential consequences like cascading role/permission deletions, and does not mention required admin permissions.

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 add meaning. It provides basic explanations for user_id and confirm_delete, but the claim that confirm_delete is 'REQUIRED' is misleading and contradicts the schema. The description fails to clarify the actual optional nature of confirm_delete or its purpose beyond a checkbox, limiting its value.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Delete a Superset user.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like superset_user_create, superset_user_update, and superset_user_get. The added note 'This operation is irreversible' further clarifies the action's nature.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool (to delete a user) and includes explicit warnings about dangerous cases (deleting the current service account or dashboard owners). While it does not name alternative tools, the guidance on side effects helps the agent decide when deletion is appropriate.

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