Delete Epic

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'delete' and does not mention irreversibility, cascading effects, permissions, error semantics, or what happens to related data.

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 very short, contains no filler, and front-loads the key verb and resource. It is concise, though it is arguably too sparse to be a fully adequate tool definition, so it does not earn a 5.

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 tool with no annotations, this definition is thin: it does not cover side effects, reversibility, preconditions, or how to get a valid epicId. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the operational context needed before calling a delete endpoint is still missing.

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, but it only uses the generic phrase 'by id' and never names the epicId parameter, explains how to obtain it, or clarifies its meaning beyond the schema property name. This leaves the agent to infer the parameter's semantics from the schema alone.

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 uses a clear verb-resource pair ('Delete an epic') and specifies that deletion is by ID, so the core purpose is unambiguous. The resource type 'epic' distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_ticket and delete_column, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of whether deleting an epic has cascading effects on tickets or columns. The agent must infer usage entirely from the verb and resource name.

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