delete_admin_users_by_itemRemove a specific admin user from Mealie by providing its unique ID to revoke administrative access and clean up user accounts.
Delete One
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| item_id | Yes | ||
| accept-language | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.20.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete One' implies a destructive action but does not state whether it is permanent, whether cascading effects occur, whether admin authorization is required, or what happens to related data. This is a significant transparency gap for a delete operation.
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?
Two words, 'Delete One', are not appropriately concise but rather under-specified. It is not a structured or informative description and omits essential context. This reads as a truncated placeholder rather than a deliberate, focused summary.
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?
Despite an output schema being present, the description fails to communicate the resource being deleted, the meaning of item_id, the destructive implications, or any usage conditions. Given the large set of similar sibling delete operations, an agent cannot reliably select and invoke this tool based on this description alone.
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%, and the description does not compensate by explaining that item_id refers to an admin user identifier or by clarifying the role of the optional accept-language parameter. The description provides no parameter meaning beyond what the raw schema field names already suggest.
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 'Delete One' states only a generic verb and an unspecified object. It adds no resource information beyond what the tool name and title already provide, and it does not distinguish this from the many other delete_*_by_item sibling tools. It is effectively a tautology of the title.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_organizers_categories_by_item, delete_households_shopping_lists_by_item, or other delete-by-item operations. No mention is made of prerequisites, admin permissions, or exclusion scenarios. The description offers no usage context at all.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.