delete_goal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to state that this is a destructive/irreversible operation, whether permissions are required, whether cascading deletion of key results occurs, or what the response looks like. For a mutation tool with zero annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 a single clear sentence with zero waste. While minimal, it is appropriately sized for the trivial one-parameter scope of the tool. However, the brevity comes at the cost of behavioral detail.

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 operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't address cascade behavior, irreversibility, or idempotency. Given sibling delete tools exist (delete_key_result, delete_space_tag), more context on distinctions would help the agent choose correctly.

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 100% with one parameter (goal_id described as 'The goal ID'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3. No compensation provided for any nuances about the format or source of the goal_id.

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 states 'Delete a goal' with a specific verb and resource. While clear, it doesn't distinguish from delete_key_result or other delete tools, and there's no elaboration on scope (e.g., whether it cascades). It's unambiguous for the core purpose but lacks differentiation from sibling delete operations.

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 tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., whether goal must exist), and no exclusions or conditions. The agent gets no context about scenarios where deletion might fail or be inappropriate, such as goals with active key results.

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