delete_issue

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

Annotations already signal destructive and open-world hints; description adds 'permanently' and clarifies the confirm parameter's role, providing useful context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second gives critical usage guideline. No wasted words.

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 tool with annotations and output schema, description covers core behavior and key nuance. Lacks return value details, but output schema presumably covers that.

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 description must compensate. It only explains confirm parameter implicitly; issue_id is left to its self-explanatory name. Adds moderate value.

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?

Clearly states 'Delete an issue permanently', uses specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like archive_issue by emphasizing permanence.

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?

Provides explicit instruction to set confirm=true only after explicit confirmation, guiding safe usage. Does not explicitly exclude alternative tools but implies destructive nature.

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