Delete Coordination Issue

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds explicit irreversible warnings and the API endpoint, reinforcing permanence. Provides behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Redundant phrasing: 'This cannot be undone' and 'This action cannot be undone' appear twice; 'Permanently removes' also repeated. Could be condensed to 2 sentences. Unnecessary inclusion of full API line.

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?

Covers basic purpose, permanence, and required parameters. Lacks differentiation from sibling delete tools (v2.0, bulk), and does not mention prerequisites, side effects, or response format. Adequate for a simple delete but incomplete for agent decision-making among similar tools.

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 both parameters are already well-described. The description merely restates that they are required and includes the API endpoint, but adds no new parameter semantics or constraints 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?

Clearly states 'Delete a Coordination Issue' with verb and resource. Repeated emphasis on permanence. Implicitly distinguishes from bulk and v2.0 siblings (suggested by the singular 'a Coordination Issue'), but does not explicitly differentiate, so not a 5.

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?

States 'Use this to permanently delete' and lists required parameters, but provides no guidance on when not to use it or alternatives like bulk or v2.0 versions. Minimal contextual advice.

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