delete_version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it never states that deletion is irreversible or what permissions are required. It does implicitly reveal that a version may have attached fix/affected issues that must be reassigned, which is useful behavioral context, but the destructive consequences remain undisclosed.

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?

One-line purpose followed by a tight Args list; front-loaded and free of padding. The arg restatements are terse but not wasteful.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but for an unannotated destructive tool the description omits irreversibility, permission requirements, and what happens when issues exist and no reassignment target is supplied. Those gaps matter for correct 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 is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does document all three parameters with their roles. The move_fix_issues_to and move_affected_issues_to explanations ('reassign fix version issues' vs 'reassign affected version issues') add genuine meaning beyond the bare schema types.

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 ('Delete a version/release'), which cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like create_version, update_version, and get_versions. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with delete_issue or other destructive siblings.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives or recovery paths. The description only enumerates arguments.

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