delete_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure. 'Permanently delete' explicitly communicates that the operation is destructive and irreversible, which is the most critical behavioral trait here. It does not disclose permission requirements, cascading effects, or error behavior, so it is only partially transparent.

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, well-structured sentence with no wasted words. 'Permanently' adds safety-relevant meaning and 'FreeIPA' scopes the resource, making every word valuable.

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 no output schema, the description provides the essential facts: what object is affected and that the action is permanent. It lacks explicit alternatives and prerequisites, but the low complexity and complete schema coverage make it adequately complete for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the uid parameter is fully documented in the input schema already. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema. A baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 uses a specific verb ('Permanently delete') and a specific resource ('FreeIPA user account'), clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like add_user, enable_user, disable_user, and get_user. It states exactly what the tool does with no ambiguity.

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 word 'permanently' implies that this tool should be used for irreversible removal rather than temporary suspension via disable_user. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or name the appropriate comparison, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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