Delete Team

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It adds two important behavioral traits: permission requirements (only owners/admins) and the fact that users are not removed along with the team. This goes beyond the basic 'delete' implication, though it does not mention irreversibility or return values.

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 three sentences long, each conveying essential information: the action, the permission prerequisite, and a critical warning about user impact. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 covers the key aspects: what it does, who can do it, and a notable side effect. It does not explain error handling or response, but given the tool's simplicity, this is reasonably complete.

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 input schema has 100% coverage: team_id is described as 'The TeamId to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 opens with 'Delete a team from the account', which is a specific verb+resource statement. It clearly distinguishes the action from sibling tools like edit_team or get_team by naming the operation directly.

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 context by stating that only account owners and administrators can delete teams, and warns that users are not affected. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the action is straightforward enough that the when-to-use scenario is obvious from the purpose.

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