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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds rich behavioral context: permanence, id never reused, loss of logged minutes, and that time-tracker entries in a separate store are untouched. These disclosures go well beyond the structured annotations and clarify real side effects.

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: core action and permanence, side-effect disclosure, and the alternative tool. No redundancy, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 destructive one-ID delete with a rich annotation set, this description is complete: it specifies what is deleted, permanence, related side effects, unaffected data, output hint about logged minutes, and the alternative to preserve the record. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 the single 'id' parameter, including an example. The description reuses 'by id' but adds no new parameter syntax, constraints, or format details. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the full burden.

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 specific verb ('Delete'), a resource ('one task'), and the scope ('by id'), while adding the consequential detail that deletion is permanent and the id never reused. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like task_done, task_update, and task_list.

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 explicitly names the alternative: 'Use task_done to keep the record.' This tells an agent when not to use task_delete (when the record must be kept) and provides the correct sibling to use instead.

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