redmine_version_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It clearly identifies the operation as destructive and requires confirmation, but it does not mention side effects, irreversibility, permissions, or failure conditions.

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 one short sentence plus a requirement, front-loading the action and endpoint. There is no wasted text or unnecessary repetition beyond the confirm note.

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 simple two-parameter delete operation, the description and schema are sufficient to make the call, but no return values, error behavior, or side effects are described. Since there is no output schema, those gaps are notable for a destructive action.

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 50%, covering confirm. The endpoint path adds meaning to id as the version identifier, but the description largely repeats the confirm requirement already present in the schema. It adds minimal new parameter information.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Delete version' with the endpoint 'DELETE /versions/:id.json'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling version tools like redmine_version_get, redmine_version_create, and redmine_version_update.

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 intended use is implied by the name and 'Delete version', and the explicit requirement 'Requires confirm: true' guides invocation. However, it does not mention when deletion is appropriate or contrast with alternatives such as version_update.

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