delete_label

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the deletion is permanent and irreversible, and that it also removes the label from every issue that has it. This is excellent transparency about side effects and destructive nature.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and critical warning, second gives usage instruction. Front-loaded, no wasted words.

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?

Given the tool is destructive with no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, side effects, prerequisite step, and user confirmation requirement. Complete for safe usage.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the id must be a number (not the name). The schema already covers repo and owner with defaults, but the warning about id type is valuable.

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 action (permanently delete a label) and the resource (label by id). It distinguishes from siblings like create_label or update_label by emphasizing that it uses numeric id, not name.

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 instructs the user to get the id from list_labels and confirm with the user before deleting. This provides clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like remove_issue_label, but that is a different operation.

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