delete_user

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

The description adds 'WARNING: This is irreversible', which goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by clarifying the permanence of the action. It does not mention the confirm or dry_run parameters, but those are already documented in the schema. The added warning provides valuable context for a destructive 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?

The description is two short sentences: the first states the action and target, the second delivers a clear warning. There is no redundancy or filler, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the destructive nature, the description provides the essential warning and purpose. The schema covers all parameters and the output schema exists, so return values need not be described. It could be slightly more helpful by referencing search_users for obtaining the ID, but the schema already includes that context.

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 schema already documents all three parameters (user_id, confirm, dry_run). The description only reinforces that deletion is by ID, which aligns with user_id but adds no new parameter-level semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the 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 clearly states the action ('Delete'), the resource ('a pfSense local user'), and the identifier method ('by ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_user, update_user, and search_users, which have different verbs and purposes.

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 does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It implies that a user ID is required but does not mention that search_users should be used to obtain the ID, nor does it contrast with alternatives like updating or deactivating a user. The only guidance is a general warning about irreversibility.

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