Permanently deletes a group only after all members are removed; requests with existing members fail with 409. Deletion cannot be undone.
Permanently delete a group. The group must have NO members or the request fails with 409. Remove all members with delete_group_users first. This cannot be undone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| group_id | Yes | A unique identifier for a group. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds substantial value: the specific 409 failure behavior, the emptiness precondition, and the irreversibility ('cannot be undone'). It does not describe auth/permission requirements or response shape, but the key destructive and failure characteristics are disclosed.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the precondition, then the mitigation and the irreversibility warning. Every sentence earns its place with zero waste.
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 1 param, no output schema, and destructiveHint already set, the description covers the critical preconditions and consequences an agent needs. It could mention permission requirements, but for a single-param delete this is close to complete.
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% and the single group_id param is documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('Permanently delete a group') and clearly distinguishes itself from delete_group_users, which it names as the prerequisite step. An agent can tell this apart from scim_delete_group or delete_group_users without opening a schema.
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?
Explicitly states the precondition (group must have NO members or fails with 409) and names the alternative tool (delete_group_users) to run first. The 'when-not' is fully spelled out via the failure mode.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.