Delete User

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys only that the operation is destructive; it says nothing about permanence/reversibility, what happens to the user's content, or required permissions, which are critical for an irreversible operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; it is efficient. It is under-specified rather than bloated, so it scores well on structure without earning a 5.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage the description omits essential context: reversibility, side effects on owned content, and permissions. It is not sufficient for an agent to call this safely.

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% and the single required parameter 'uid' is undocumented in both schema and description. The description implies the account is identified by some key but adds no format, type, or lookup guidance beyond what the parameter name suggests.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Delete a user account'), so an agent knows exactly what operation it performs. However, it does nothing to distinguish this from nearby siblings such as block_user, unblock_user, or remove_role, which are plausible alternatives for the same intent.

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?

There is no guidance on when to delete a user versus merely blocking one, no stated prerequisites, and no mention of an alternative tool. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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