delete_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the optional drive folder deletion but does not disclose that the action is destructive, permanent, or requires confirmation. This is a significant gap for a deletion tool.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and is free of unnecessary words. It earns a perfect score for conciseness.

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 operation with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain whether the project itself is deleted, that confirm must be true for execution, or the irreversible nature of the drive folder deletion. The schema covers parameters but not the overarching consequences, leaving the agent without essential context.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline for this dimension is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning merely by mentioning the drive folder deletion option, which aligns with the delete_drive_folder parameter, but does not substantially enhance understanding beyond 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 clearly identifies the tool as deleting project settings and optionally the associated Google Drive folder, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_document or delete_session. However, 'delete project settings' is slightly ambiguous as to whether the entire project is deleted or just its settings, preventing a perfect score.

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 on when to use this tool versus update_project or other project management tools. It also fails to mention the required confirmation parameter or warn that deletion is irreversible, leaving the agent without context for safe invocation.

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