tasks_delete

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying that deletion cascades to 'related comments, activity, and notifications.' This complements the destructiveHint annotation with concrete effects.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that cover core action, identifier flexibility, and side effects. No redundant words or unnecessary details.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what happens (deletion of task and related data) and acceptable inputs. It lacks error handling details, but that is acceptable given annotations and simplicity.

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 schema description already covers the parameter's accepted formats (UUID, short_id, title), and the tool description repeats this. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no new parameter-level meaning 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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('permanently delete') and resource ('task'). It lists accepted identifier formats, which distinguishes it from siblings like tasks_resolve or tasks_update.

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?

The description provides clear context by indicating that any identifier (UUID, short_id, title) is accepted, but it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool or mention alternatives. The irreversible nature is implied.

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