Delete a Nuvio profile

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

Beyond the annotations already marking this as destructive, the description discloses that the operation is irreversible, wipes all profile data, and requires a two-phase confirmation with a short-lived token. It also explains the exact call pattern: first call to obtain a token, second call to execute.

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 short and front-loads the destructive scope, then gives the warning and usage pattern. Minor redundancy exists: 'this cannot be undone' and 'This operation cannot be undone' repeat the same point.

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 description covers the essential destructive scope, irreversibility, Profile 1 restriction, and the two-phase token flow. It leaves the confirm parameter's role ambiguous and does not describe the response format of the first call, which an agent needs to reliably extract the token.

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 description clarifies confirmation_token's two-phase semantics and implies profile_index must be 2–6 by stating Profile 1 cannot be deleted. However, the schema's confirm parameter is left unclear: its description mentions 'reversible destructive changes,' which conflicts with this tool's irreversible nature, and the description never explains how confirm relates to confirmation_token.

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 states a precise verb and resource: 'Delete a profile and ALL of its data,' and enumerates the affected data categories (addons, settings, collections, library, history). It also adds the key constraint that Profile 1 cannot be deleted, clearly distinguishing this from profile creation/update 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?

It gives clear operational context: this is the whole-profile deletion path, including all associated data, and explicitly warns that Profile 1 is excluded. It does not name alternative sibling tools, but the exhaustive deletion scope makes the intended use clear.

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