infomaniak_delete_account_team

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

The description adds the behavioral detail 'Two-phase commit with a fresh team snapshot guard,' which goes beyond the annotations' destructive and non-read-only hints. This provides insight into the internal safety mechanism without contradicting the annotations.

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 with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core function and a key behavioral detail.

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 operation, the description is minimal. It includes a key safety note but does not explain the snapshot guard or when the confirmation_token is required. The output schema covers return values, but gaps remain about prerequisites and the two-phase commit process.

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 67%: team_id and account_id have descriptions, but confirmation_token does not. The description's mention of two-phase commit hints at the token's role but does not explicitly explain it, so it adds only marginal value beyond the schema.

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 an account team' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling team operations like create/update/add/remove, and the extra detail about two-phase commit adds specificity.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_account_team or remove_account_team_users. The description does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions.

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