sigma_delete_team

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description goes beyond by explaining that confirm=True is mandatory, which is a safety behavior not captured by annotations. This adds valuable context about the confirmation safeguard without contradicting the annotations.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded and contains no extraneous words. It delivers the essential information efficiently, earning the highest score for 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 simple delete operation with an output schema and destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the core behavior and the confirmation requirement. The tool's simplicity and existing structured metadata make this level of detail sufficient.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description partially compensates by explaining the confirm parameter's requirement (must be true). However, it does not elaborate on team_id, leaving its meaning to be inferred from the parameter name. This is adequate but not fully compensating.

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 'Delete a team' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling delete tools like sigma_delete_workspace. The addition of 'Requires confirm=True' adds operational nuance without obscuring the core purpose.

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 implies usage when a team needs to be deleted, and it provides the confirmation requirement as a usage condition. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when not to use it), leaving the guidance somewhat implicit.

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