delete_comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits like whether deletion is permanent, requires authentication, or has rate limits. It does not add context beyond the basic operation, leaving gaps in understanding the tool's impact.

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, clearly front-loading the purpose. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it efficient and easy to understand.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return values, error conditions, or behavioral implications, making it incomplete for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 the schema already documents both parameters (taskId and commentId) with descriptions. The description does not add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints, but meets the baseline for adequate coverage.

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 'Delete a comment from a task' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (comment from a task), distinguishing it from siblings like delete_task or delete_project. However, it does not specify if it's permanent or reversible, which could help differentiate further from similar tools.

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 alternatives, such as whether it requires specific permissions or if there are prerequisites like comment ownership. The description lacks context on exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools like delete_task_attachment.

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