delete_organization

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

No annotations are present, so the description fully carries the burden. It discloses that the action is irreversible and will delete all associated workspaces, documents, and data. This is critical for safe usage, though it omits details like authentication requirements or error handling.

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 with a clear structure: action, warning, arguments, returns. Every sentence adds value, and the important caution is front-loaded.

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 has only one parameter and is destructive, the description covers the necessary behavioral consequences and return type. However, it could be slightly improved by mentioning potential errors or prerequisites.

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 description includes an 'Args' section that explains the parameter 'org_id' as 'L'ID de l'organisation à supprimer', adding meaning beyond the schema which only specifies type. This is valuable for an agent to understand what to provide.

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 clearly states 'Supprime une organisation' (Deletes an organization), with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools by focusing on organizations, and the warning about cascading deletion reinforces the specific 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 a clear warning about irreversibility and cascading deletion, which guides the agent to use this tool with caution. It implicitly tells when not to use (if unsure), but does not explicitly mention alternative actions like archiving.

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