Destroy Task Item

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

Goes well beyond annotations by disclosing irreversibility ('This cannot be undone'), repeat-call behavior ('a repeat call returns 404'), and specific failure modes ('401 when the token has expired, 403 without tool permission, and 404 when an id does not resolve'). These are actionable behavioral insights relevant to an agent.

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 reasonably sized but contains redundancy: 'Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling' is essentially repeated in 'id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first.' This duplication could be trimmed, making the structure less efficient than it could be.

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 delete operation, the description covers prerequisites (confirm id), irreversibility, error payloads, required parameters, and API endpoint. It does not describe the success response, but absence of an output schema reduces that need. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to select and invoke the tool safely.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds a meaningful semantic for id ('must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first') but otherwise repeats required parameter names, providing marginal additional value 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 states the action with 'Send a task item to the recycle bin' and 'Permanently removes the task item,' naming the resource (task item). However, the mixed language around recycle bin vs. permanent removal introduces slight confusion about the exact behavior, though not enough to obscure the core purpose.

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?

Provides procedural guidance: 'Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling' and 'resolve it with the matching list tool first.' This tells the agent what to do before invoking, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like delete_task or state when this tool should be preferred over alternatives.

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