Delete a Jira issue by key, optionally including its subtasks, to remove outdated or duplicate work items.
Delete a Jira issue.
Args: issue_key: Issue key (e.g., "KAN-123") delete_subtasks: Also delete subtasks (default: True)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| issue_key | Yes | ||
| delete_subtasks | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. 'Delete a Jira issue' implies a destructive, irreversible operation but does not state irreversibility, permission requirements, or side effects (e.g., linked issues). It does note subtasks are also deleted by default, which is one useful behavior, but far from sufficient 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 lines, front-loaded verb+resource, then parameter notes. No wasted text. Could be slightly more structured with warnings, but efficient.
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 tool with no annotations and no output schema explanation, the description omits critical context: irreversibility, required permissions, effect on linked issues, and return value. Incomplete for safe invocation.
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 0%, so description should compensate. It explains issue_key with an example and clarifies delete_subtasks default True and meaning. Adds some value, but lacks detail on what happens if delete_subtasks is false (error? orphaned?) and doesn't document the boolean fully. Marginal.
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?
Clear specific verb+resource (delete a Jira issue). Unambiguous against siblings like create_issue, update_issue, get_issue. An agent can confidently select this tool.
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?
No indication of when to use this vs other operations, nor any warning about irreversibility. Doesn't mention prerequisites (permissions) or guidance about subtasks default behavior. Missing explicit when-to-use context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.