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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the crucial nuance that deletion is soft but unrecoverable ('no way to restore the task'), which materially informs an agent beyond the binary destructive flag.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what it deletes, the irreversibility constraint, and the usage boundary. Front-loaded with the action and no redundant filler.

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?

For a two-parameter delete tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description supplies the key missing behavioral detail (soft delete with no restore). No output schema exists, and nothing an agent needs to call it safely is absent.

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 100%, with both ID and key fully documented in the schema (ID preferred over key). The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is acceptable given the schema already carries that information.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Deletes a task or bug') plus scope ('shared team data'). The closing line explicitly distinguishes deletion from finishing work, separating it from the sibling task_done without requiring schema inspection.

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?

Explicitly conditions use on the user's direct request and warns that finishing work is not deletion, giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming the alternative tool (task_done) that should be used instead.

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