cigchat_subscriber_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It explicitly flags 'DESTRUCTIVE: irreversible' and describes the confirmation step, which are critical safety traits. However, it does not detail what the impact statement contains or whether related data (e.g., conversations) is cascade-deleted.

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: a single action statement, a destructive warning, the confirmation workflow, and the required scope. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the most critical aspects: irreversibility, confirmation flow, and auth requirement. It lacks explanation of `user_ns` semantics and any post-deletion effects, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a delete operation.

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 50%: `confirm` is well-documented in the schema, but `user_ns` has no description. The tool description does not explain what `user_ns` represents, nor does it add meaning to `confirm` beyond the schema. Thus the description adds minimal parameter semantics.

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 subscriber' with an explicit endpoint, making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It is easily distinguishable from sibling subscriber tools like remove_tag or unsubscribe_from_bot, as it targets the subscriber record itself.

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 provides specific usage guidance: call without `confirm` first to get an impact statement, then pass the confirmation token after human approval. It also states the required 'Manage Flow' scope. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for non-destructive actions, but the two-step confirmation workflow is clear.

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