Delete epic

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond the word 'group' – it does not say the deletion is permanent, whether child issues/epics are affected, or what permissions are required.

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?

Extremely short and front-loaded, which is good, but the brevity crosses into under-specification rather than efficient economy – the sentence is too small to carry the weight this tool needs.

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 with six undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description should state required identifiers, irreversibility, and permission needs. None of that is present, so an agent knows what the tool does but not how to call it correctly or safely.

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?

Six parameters exist with 0% schema description coverage and zero required fields, so the schema gives almost no semantic help. The phrase 'group epic' weakly implies group_id and epic_iid are the operative inputs, but data, title, description, and state_event are entirely unexplained (and their presence on a delete tool is confusing).

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?

A specific verb plus resource ('Delete a group epic') that distinguishes it from siblings like gitlab_delete_issue, gitlab_delete_release, and the update counterpart gitlab_update_epic. It could be sharper about which identifier scope (group vs project) is required, but the core action is unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this versus gitlab_update_epic (to close rather than destroy an epic) or other delete tools, and no mention of prerequisites such as permissions or confirmation. The agent must infer everything from the name alone.

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