delete_task_document

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. However, it only states 'Remove a document attachment' without clarifying whether this permanently deletes the file, requires permissions, or has side effects like unlinking only. This is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be restructured to include essential behavioral details without becoming verbose, so it scores slightly below perfect.

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?

The tool has an output schema but the description does not mention it or the return value. Given the low complexity (2 parameters, no nested objects), the description is minimally adequate but leaves gaps in understanding the tool's effect and response. It is complete enough for a simple delete but lacks context about output.

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 adds nothing beyond the parameter names. It does not explain that 'task_id' identifies the task and 'document_id' identifies the attachment, nor does it specify expected formats. The description adds no value over the schema.

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 'Remove a document attachment from a task' uses a clear verb-resource combination, clearly stating what the tool does. It sufficiently distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_task' (different resource) and 'create_task_document' (opposite action).

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'delete_file'. The context of when to remove a document attachment versus deleting the file itself is implied but not stated, leaving the agent without specific usage boundaries.

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