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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true, but the description adds the important behavioral trait that the deletion cannot be undone)Skip. This clarifies permanence beyond the annotation. It does not detail permissions or side effects, but the added irreversibility is meaningful for a destructive 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?

Two short sentences, no filler. The core action is stated firstabb, and the critical caveat about irreversibility is included without bloat. Every word earns its place.

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 simple delete operation with two fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It identifies the resource, confirms irreversibility, and the schema covers the parameters. It lacks only minor practical details like expected return values or failure behavior, but these are not essential for a straightforward deletion.

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%, so both taskId and commentId are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond restating the resource context, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific resource ('a comment'), and the scope ('from a standalone task'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like delete_standalone_attachment, delete_standalone_task, and the create/list comment 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, no exclusions, and no mention of related tools like list_standalone_comments for obtaining a commentId. Usage context is only implied by the wording 'Delete a comment from a standalone task.'

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