Delete Tracker issue link

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the '(irreversible)' note largely restates structured data. The only genuinely new behavioral fact is the return contract ('Returns an acknowledgement on success'), which matters because there is no output schema. No mention of required permissions or side effects on linked issues.

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 short sentences with no filler. The destructive/irreversible nature is front-loaded before the parameter-sourcing and return notes, which is exactly the right ordering for a delete tool.

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 delete operation whose safety profile is fully covered by annotations, the description supplies the essentials: what it removes, that it cannot be undone, where the id comes from, and what a successful call returns. Only permission requirements and the existence of a similarly named sibling are unaddressed.

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% and both parameters are documented there, including that link_id comes from links_list. The description's 'Get link_id from links_list' therefore duplicates the schema rather than adding syntax, format, or edge-case meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Remove a link between two Tracker issues'), which is instantly distinguishable from sibling reads like tracker_links_list or writes like tracker_links_create. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-named sibling tracker_entities_links_delete, leaving an agent to guess between two plausible deletion 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?

The description tells the agent where the required link_id comes from ('Get link_id from links_list'), which is a useful routing hint. It offers no when-to-use or when-not guidance relative to alternatives such as tracker_links_list, tracker_links_create, or tracker_entities_links_delete.

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