fossa_delete_org_setting

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

Despite annotations already indicating destructive behavior, the description adds valuable context: 'target="logo" clears the organization's uploaded logo and nothing else,' clarifying the exact scope of destruction. It also discloses the required environment variable safeguards, going beyond the structured 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 compact and front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence serves a distinct function: stating the action, highlighting write/destructive requirements, explaining the target parameter, and pointing to an alternative. No unnecessary words.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, effect scope, and an alternative. It is self-contained and does not require additional context from sibling tool names or schema.

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?

The schema has one parameter with a const value and no description, so the description compensates by explaining the parameter's effect: 'target="logo" clears the organization's uploaded logo and nothing else.' This adds behavioral meaning, though the schema's const already constrains the value, slightly limiting added 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 'Delete a FOSSA organization's logo' with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes itself by noting 'clears the organization's uploaded logo and nothing else' and references the alternative SAML deletion tool, differentiating it from sibling deletion tools.

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 explicitly mentions required environment variables (FOSSA_ORG_ID, FOSSA_ALLOW_WRITES=true, FOSSA_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true) and provides an explicit alternative: 'To remove the organization's SAML single sign-on configuration... use fossa_delete_saml_settings.' This fully guides when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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