admin-delete-all-user-preferences

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states that it deletes all preferences, which indicates destructiveness, but it does not mention irreversibility, permission requirements, or potential side effects. For a destructive admin tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise sentence that starts with the key role indicator and states the action and scope. It is front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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 tool's destructive nature, the lack of annotations and output schema means the description should provide more context about what happens on success, whether the action is reversible, and any prerequisites. The current description is too sparse for a complete understanding.

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?

The schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It only mentions a 'specific user' but does not explain the format or meaning of user_id beyond that. The description adds minimal value over 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 the action ('delete'), the resource ('all preferences'), and the target (a specific user). It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like admin-delete-user-preference by indicating the scope is 'all' preferences and is admin-specific.

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 use case for deleting all user preferences, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this over alternatives (e.g., admin-delete-user-preference) or provide any exclusion criteria. The 'Admin:' prefix suggests it is for privileged operations, but no explicit guidance is given.

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