todoist_delete_personal_label

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Delete' implies a destructive mutation, it doesn't specify whether this action is reversible, what happens to tasks using this label (e.g., if they lose the label or remain unaffected), or any error conditions (e.g., invalid ID handling). This leaves significant gaps for a mutation 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks critical context: what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation or error details), behavioral traits like irreversibility, and usage prerequisites. This leaves the agent under-informed about risks and outcomes.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'label_id' clearly documented in the schema as 'ID of the label to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or sourcing instructions, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and resource ('a personal label from Todoist'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'todoist_remove_shared_labels' by specifying 'personal label' rather than shared labels, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'todoist_delete_task' or other deletion 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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing the label ID from 'todoist_get_personal_labels'), when deletion is appropriate versus updating with 'todoist_update_personal_label', or any constraints like permissions or effects on associated tasks.

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