Delete user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing: not whether the deletion is permanent or recoverable, what happens to the user's requests/tasks/notes, whether admin permissions are required, or what the response contains. For a destructive mutation this is a severe gap.

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 sentence is short but that brevity is under-specification rather than conciseness; there is no front-loaded context, no scoping, and no information an agent can act on.

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?

A destructive single-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter needs far more description than this. Nothing about safety, side effects, permissions, or return behavior is supplied.

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 0% for the single required user_id parameter, and the description says nothing about it. It is unclear whether user_id is an internal numeric ID or a numeric-string identifier, or how to obtain it — the description does not compensate at all.

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?

"Delete a user" restates the tool name and title verbatim, adding no scope, target domain, or distinction from sibling mutation tools like delete_request or delete_change. The verb+resource is clear only because the name already is; the description itself contributes nothing.

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?

No guidance on when to use this rather than update_user, or whether a soft-delete/restore path exists (siblings include restore_request and trash_change, suggesting lifecycle patterns). The agent gets no context for choosing this tool over alternatives.

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