delete_group

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action and the confirmation requirement but does not disclose that deletion is permanent, whether it can be undone, or what permissions are needed. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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, front-loaded with the action. It contains no fluff and every word adds value: 'non-default' and 'explicit confirmation' are essential constraints.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not mention success/failure behavior, error conditions, or whether the deletion is permanent. The sibling tools include preview delete operations for other resources, but no such preview exists for groups, so the description should clarify the immediate effect.

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 0%, so description must compensate. The phrase 'explicit confirmation' adds meaning to the 'confirm' parameter, but it does not explain 'groupId' beyond the resource name. The description partially compensates but leaves one parameter undocumented semantically.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('non-default site group'), clearly stating the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_group' or 'create_group' by indicating it's a deletion operation and includes a constraint ('non-default') and a requirement ('explicit confirmation').

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 when to use: only for non-default groups, which excludes default groups. It also mentions 'explicit confirmation' as a user action required. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative actions like previewing the delete or applying group updates, though the unique delete verb makes the context clear.

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