delete_project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the default resource detachment and the delete_resources option, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, or recoverability. A bit more detail would be beneficial.

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 sentences, succinct and front-loaded with the action. Each sentence serves a purpose: stating the action and detailing the default behavior and parameter.

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 the simple tool (3 parameters, one boolean), the description covers the core behavior and a crucial nuance. The output schema likely describes the return value, so that gap is acceptable. Minor missing elements like error handling or prerequisites.

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%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds significant value for `delete_resources` by explaining that resources are 'detached but kept' by default, clarifying the schema's description. No additional value for other parameters.

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 action 'Delete a project' and distinguishes the default behavior (detaching resources) from the option to also delete them with `delete_resources=true`. This differentiates it from other project-related tools like update_project or get_project.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool (to delete a project) and explains the default versus optional deletion of resources. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like delete_job for individual resources, the context from sibling tools makes it clear this is for whole projects.

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