Delete A Proposal From The Project

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'This cannot be undone' and 'Permanently removes' but these are redundant with the annotations. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., required permissions, side effects) are disclosed beyond what annotations already provide.

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 repetitive, stating 'This cannot be undone' twice and 'Permanently removes' in a redundant manner. The additional information (required params, API endpoint) is useful, but the redundancy wastes space.

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 description covers the core action, permanence, and required parameters. It includes the API version and endpoint. However, it does not mention any preconditions like the proposal must exist or specific permissions needed, which would make it more complete for a delete operation.

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 baseline is 3. The description lists the required parameters but adds no new information beyond what the schema already provides. No additional meaning or context is added for the 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 it deletes a proposal from the project, using specific verbs and identifying the resource as Bid Board records. However, it does not differentiate from the v1.0 version of the same tool, so sibling distinction is lacking.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., archiving or soft-delete). It simply says 'Use this to permanently delete' without any context about prerequisites or when to avoid it.

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