kaiten_delete_board

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete,' implying destructiveness, but does not mention permanence, cascading effects on cards or lanes, required permissions, or any other operational consequences.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and the object, making it instantly scannable.

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 annotations and no output schema, this description is under-specified. It omits important context such as whether the deletion is irreversible, what happens to dependent entities, and whether special permissions are required.

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 descriptions for both parameters at 100% coverage, so the description does not need to repeat them. However, it adds no additional meaning about the relationship between space_id and board_id or any 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete') and the specific resource ('a Kaiten board'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from the many sibling delete_* tools by naming the exact target resource.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_project or delete_space, nor any prerequisites or caveats. The agent must rely solely on the tool name to infer appropriate usage.

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