yougile_delete_user

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description aligns with them. It adds the company scope but does not disclose irreversible consequences, cascading effects, or permission requirements beyond what the annotation implies.

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?

One concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. No unnecessary 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with destructive annotation, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers what the tool does without needing to explain return values (no output schema). Minor gap: it does not specify the effect on user's associated data or confirm if removal is permanent.

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% with the single 'id' parameter described as 'User UUID'. The description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline 3 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 'Remove a user from the company' clearly states the specific action (remove) and resource (user) with the scope (company), distinguishing it from sibling user tools like get_user, update_user, and invite_user.

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 usage (when a user needs to be removed) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites, or exclusions. It does not mention that this is a destructive action versus an update.

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