delete_group

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

Annotations already communicate that this is destructive, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as irreversibility, impact on group offsets or members, or behavior when the group does not exist. With no output schema, these details would be valuable for the agent.

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 a single, short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to stating the tool's purpose.

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?

The schema fully documents the two required parameters and the annotations provide the destructive safety signal, so the description is minimally sufficient for invocation. However, for a destructive operation with no output schema, it lacks context about postconditions and prerequisites, leaving some uncertainty.

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 fully describes both parameters ('cluster' and 'groupName'), so schema description coverage is 100%. The free-text description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb and resource, 'Delete a consumer group', which unambiguously states the operation. It also differentiates this tool from sibling tools like get_groups and delete_topic by naming the consumer group as the target.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no caveats such as whether the group must be inactive or unused. The usage context must be inferred entirely from the tool name and description.

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