delete_account

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint: true, readOnlyHint: false), the description adds critical behavioral detail: it previews on first call, requires confirm: true and confirm_name, and is irreversible. This significantly clarifies the tool's runtime behavior, which the annotations alone do not convey.

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 sentences with no wasted words: the main action, the destructive warning, and the alternative usage. The most important information (deletion and preview behavior) is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place.

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 output schema, the description fully covers the invocation flow: preview, confirmation, and the alternative of closing. It explains the safeguard mechanism and the irreversible nature. An agent has all necessary information to call it correctly without additional 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 coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has a clear description (account, confirm, confirm_name). The description reiterates the confirmation requirements but does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema. Since the schema fully documents the parameters, the description's contribution is minimal, consistent with the baseline of 3.

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 verb and resource: 'Delete an account and its entire transaction history.' It also conveys the destructive scope and implies the operation is distinct from closing an account, which is mentioned as a preferred alternative. While it doesn't name a sibling tool explicitly, the action is unambiguous and distinct from other delete tools like delete_transaction.

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?

It explicitly provides usage guidance: 'Prefer closing an account when you just want to retire it' gives a clear when-not-to-use condition and an alternative behavior. The description also explains the two-step confirmation process, setting expectations for how to invoke the tool safely.

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