Delete Users Api Tokens By Token

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 only states that the tool deletes an api_token, implying destructiveness, but it does not mention irreversibility, permission requirements, side effects, error behavior, or whether the token belongs to a specific user. This is minimal disclosure.

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 short, but under-specification is not conciseness. The phrase 'from the Database' is filler that adds no useful information, while critical details about parameters and usage are absent. The description does not earn its place as a sufficient guide.

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 tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and a required parameter, this description is inadequate. It does not explain the token_id semantics, the accept-language parameter, the response format, or any authorization or safety considerations. An agent cannot reliably select and invoke this tool based solely on this definition.

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 provides no explanation of the required token_id parameter or the optional accept-language parameter. An agent has no guidance on what token_id refers to or how to construct a valid request. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema's bare type information.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Delete api_token from the Database.' This clearly identifies the operation as deleting an API token, which is consistent with the tool's name. It does not, however, explain whose token or provide sibling differentiation, leaving it slightly generic.

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 create_users_api_tokens, or when deleting a token is appropriate. The description simply states what the tool does, not when or under what conditions it should be invoked.

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