weeek_delete_task_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the single most important trait: deletion is permanent with no trash or recovery path. It omits permission requirements and confirmation/response behavior, which keeps it out of 5 territory.

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?

Three short sentences, no filler, with the irreversible-deletion warning front-loaded ahead of the sibling alternative. Every clause carries distinct information.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what disappears permanently, which sibling to use instead for edits, and where the ID originates. Only authorization and failure-mode context is missing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does partially: it tells the agent that comment_id comes from weeek_list_task_comments. However, task_id is left entirely unexplained, and neither typing nor format nuance beyond the schema is added.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a comment') with an unambiguous scope qualifier ('for good — Weeek keeps no trash'). It explicitly names the sibling it is not (weeek_update_task_comment), so an agent can separate deletion from editing without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit alternative and the condition that selects it: 'To fix wording, prefer weeek_update_task_comment.' It also routes the agent to weeek_list_task_comments to obtain the identifier. It stops short of stating general when-not conditions (e.g. bulk cleanup, permissions), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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