Delete user

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

The description fully discloses behavior: irreversible deletion, return messages ('User deleted' or 'Not deleted: <reason>'), and safety checks (username match, confirm required). Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and description adds valuable context without contradiction.

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 concise, using three sentences to convey all key information: destructive effect, return messages, safety guards, prerequisites, and alternative. Every sentence adds value.

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 and multiple parameters, the description covers all essential aspects: return values, safety mechanisms, lookup steps, and alternatives. No output schema exists, so the description compensates adequately.

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 100%, but the description adds significant meaning: explains that id is obtained from search, username serves as a safety check, and confirm defaults to false. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 explicitly states that the tool permanently removes a user, using the verb 'deletes' and highlighting its destructive nature. It distinguishes from alternatives like keycloak_user_set_enabled, making purpose clear.

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 clear guidelines: use keycloak_user_get or keycloak_user_search first to obtain id and username, and consider keycloak_user_set_enabled as a non-destructive alternative. It also explains the confirm parameter safety guard.

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