Delete an organization

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is an irreversible-style mutation and safe to retry. The description adds the required permission, which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about cascading effects (do the org's endpoints/users go with it?) or recoverability.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and permission last. "Removes an organization from the enterprise" is mild restatement of the first sentence, but nothing is verbose or padded.

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?

An output schema exists and the annotations carry the safety profile, so return values and risk are covered elsewhere. The one substantive gap is whether deletion cascades to child resources, which an agent deciding to call a destructive tool would want to know.

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 100%, so org_id, confirm, and dry_run are fully documented with their constraints. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable at this coverage level.

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?

Specific verb + resource ("Delete an organization") with a clarifying scope sentence ("Removes an organization from the enterprise"), which cleanly distinguishes it from update_organization and create_organization among the siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming the adjacent tools, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

Provides one prerequisite ("Perm: manage_organizations") but gives no guidance on when deletion is appropriate versus alternatives such as removing members or updating the org, and no warning about irreversibility. The dry_run/confirm guardrails exist only in the schema, not in the description.

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