delete_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the trash/permanent distinction but doesn't address critical aspects like whether deletion is reversible, permission requirements, or system behavior after deletion. For a destructive operation, this is inadequate.

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 extremely concise (6 words) with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and efficiently communicates the key behavioral choice between trash and permanent deletion.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after deletion, whether there are confirmation steps, what permissions are needed, or what the response contains. The context signals show this is a mutation tool that needs more behavioral disclosure.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description mentions the trash/permanent distinction which aligns with the 'permanent' parameter, but doesn't add meaningful semantic context beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Move to trash or delete permanently') and resource ('task'), making the purpose unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_note', but the tool name provides that context.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, consequences of permanent deletion, or when to choose trash versus permanent deletion, despite having a 'permanent' parameter.

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