infomaniak_delete_drive_user

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: 'destructive two-phase commit' explains the staged deletion process and implies the confirmation_token's role, while 'current user guard' warns that deleting yourself is not possible. This goes beyond the simple destructiveHint=true already in 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 a single sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action. Every word adds value, and it successfully conveys the purpose and critical behavioral traits in a compact form.

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 three-parameter tool with an output schema and strong annotations, the description covers the essential context: what it does, that it is destructive, and that a two-phase commit protects against accidental deletion. It could mention consequences (e.g., loss of access) but is otherwise 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 coverage is only 67% because confirmation_token lacks a schema description. The mention of 'two-phase commit' in the description adds semantics that help infer why confirmation_token exists, supplementing the schema. The drive_id description already explains discovery via list_drives.

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 begins with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Delete a kDrive user from a drive.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like lock_drive_user, unlock_drive_user, and update_drive_user, and the destructive nature is immediately evident.

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 implies the tool is used to remove a user from a drive, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the schema note for drive_id referencing list_drives. No explicit guidance is given for when not to use this tool.

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