Habitica: delete a task

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds the non-obvious safety gate: the tool mutates nothing unless confirm=true. That is exactly the kind of behavior an agent cannot infer from the schema or annotations alone.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the irreversible action and immediately followed by the required safety protocol. No 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?

Output schema exists, so the preview's return shape needn't be spelled out; the destructive nature, the consent workflow, and the accept-forms of the task parameter are all covered.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description nevertheless reinforces the meaning of confirm as a human-consent gate rather than a mere boolean switch, and pairs it with the preview semantics.

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 ('Permanently delete a task') plus the key qualifier of irreversibility, which separates it cleanly from habitica_update_task and habitica_score_task.

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?

Gives an explicit two-step workflow: call without confirm to preview, show it to the user, then delete only on agreement. It does not name sibling alternatives for non-destructive edits, but the when/when-not condition is unambiguous.

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