redmine_delete_version

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

Without annotations, the description discloses permanence, no soft-delete, the 422 error condition, and respect for read-only mode. These are key behavioral traits. It could also mention required permissions or cascade effects, but currently provides solid transparency.

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 sentences: the first states core purpose, second gives error guidance, third notes read-only handling. Each sentence is essential and front-loaded. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, permanence, error handling, and a constraint. It lacks mention of prerequisites like version existence or permissions, but is otherwise complete.

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 sole parameter 'version_id' is described as 'by id' in the description, but this adds minimal value beyond the schema. With 0% schema coverage, the description could elaborate more on how to obtain the id or its format.

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 first sentence clearly states the action: 'Delete a version by id.' It also specifies it's permanent with no soft-delete, distinguishing it from other version operations like create or update.

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 guidance on handling a common error (422) and suggests a workaround using redmine_assign_issue_to_version. It also notes that it honors REDMINE_MCP_READ_ONLY. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other deletion tools or state prerequisites.

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