delete_stages

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. While it mentions the return structure (items array, counts, errors), it fails to state that deletion is permanent or discuss side effects like cascading deletes, authorization requirements, or rate limits. Critical behavioral details are missing for a destructive operation.

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?

The description is concise (two sentences), front-loads the core action and key behavior, and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description helpfully outlines the response format, but it omits essential context for a deletion tool: no mention of permanence, error handling specifics, or the optional nature of projectId. The sibling set includes many similar tools, yet no comparative guidance is provided.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about array-based calling and unified interface, but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., no validation rules, no format hints).

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 the tool deletes workflow stages, supports array-based input for single or batch operations, and details the return format. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete_work_items' by specifying the resource type and the unified interface for single/batch calls.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'delete_work_items' for other resources, or manual deletion via other means). Prerequisites like project ID being optional are only in the schema, not in the description. The description lacks when-not-to-use or alternative tool mentions.

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