delete_user_group

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The note 'Members are not deleted' is a useful side-effect clarification, but the description does not mention other aspects such as permission requirements, reversibility, or whether the deletion is permanent. It adds some value beyond the tool name but is still sparse.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that immediately convey the action and the key non-destructive side effect. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple one-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description is largely adequate: it states the purpose and highlights the most important behavioral consequence (members not deleted). It lacks usage guidance, but that was scored separately. The description is complete enough for an agent to understand the basic operation.

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 covers the single 'id' parameter with 100% coverage, providing a clear description ('ID of the resource'). The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage is appropriate.

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 ('user group'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_user_group, update_user_group, or get_user_group. The additional statement 'Members are not deleted' further clarifies the operation's scope.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or situations where it should be avoided. The only contextual hint is the note about members not being deleted, but this is more of a behavioral clarification than usage guidance.

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