delete-team

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It lacks disclosure of behavioral traits: no mention of hard vs soft delete implications, recursive deletion consequences, auth requirements, or irreversibility of hard deletes. The description is too sparse for a mutation tool.

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 sentence that is efficient and front-loaded. It earns its place but could be slightly more structured by adding a bullet or two for key behavioral notes.

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 complexity of a delete operation (three parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not cover idempotency, effects on related entities, or error conditions, leaving the agent with insufficient context.

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 coverage is 100% for all 3 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no further meaning beyond parameter names; it does not explain the semantics of hardDelete or recursive beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the action (delete) and resource (team), with the qualifier 'by UUID' clarifying the identifier. It is specific and distinct from generic actions, though it does not differentiate from other delete-* sibling tools.

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 (e.g., update-team, other delete-* tools). No context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions is given.

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