Open WebUI MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to do so. It doesn't indicate whether the deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., affecting dependent tools), or provides confirmation feedback. For a destructive operation, this lack of transparency is critical.

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 single sentence, 'Delete a function.', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. While under-specified, it's structurally efficient without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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's complexity (a destructive delete operation), lack of annotations, low schema coverage, and presence of an output schema (which might handle return values), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address safety, prerequisites, or behavioral expectations, making it inadequate for reliable agent use despite the output schema potentially covering response details.

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 0% description coverage, with the parameter 'function_id' only labeled generically. The description adds no semantic details about the parameter, such as what constitutes a valid function ID, where to find it, or format examples. It doesn't compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 'Delete a function' restates the tool name with minimal elaboration, making it a tautology. It specifies the verb ('Delete') and resource ('function'), but doesn't distinguish it from sibling deletion tools like delete_channel or delete_file, nor does it clarify what type of function is being deleted (e.g., code function, mathematical function, etc.).

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing the function ID), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like delete_all_chats or toggle_function, leaving the agent without context for appropriate selection.

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