Runn: delete phase

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It reveals that deletion may fail if the phase still has attached data and advises migrating first, which is valuable behavioral context beyond the bare 'delete' action.

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 action and endpoint, and every sentence adds value. No filler or redundancy.

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 IDs, the description covers purpose, usage prerequisites, and failure mode. It lacks mention of return value or whether deletion is permanent, but these are arguably implied by 'Delete'. Given no output schema and no annotations, it is reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the endpoint with {id} and {phaseId}, which implies both parameters, but does not explicitly define their meanings or types. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description could have clarified which ID corresponds to project vs phase.

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 "Delete a phase" with the HTTP endpoint, making the action and resource explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_phase and update_phase.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool (after actuals/assignments have been migrated) and warns when it may fail (if attached data remains), including a 'migrate first' directive. This is clear when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance.

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