Delete Tracker queue

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds critical detail beyond them: the deletion cascades to all contained issues, the object moves to a recycle bin, restoration is possible only for a limited window, and the call returns an acknowledgement. That is exactly the extra behavioral context an agent needs before a destructive call.

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 with zero waste. The most important fact (destroys all issues) is front-loaded and capitalized, and the recovery and return-value notes follow in descending priority.

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 one-parameter destructive tool, the description covers cascade scope, reversibility window, recovery tool, and response behavior, while annotations handle the safety flags and no output schema is needed. Nothing an agent requires to call this correctly 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 100% and the single queue_id parameter is fully documented in the schema (queue key or numeric id). The description adds no additional format or example detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 Tracker queue') and immediately qualifies scope by emphasizing it removes ALL its issues. An agent can distinguish this from sibling operations like tracker_queues_tag_remove or tracker_queues_restore without opening any 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 clear operating context: the queue goes to the recycle bin and can be restored for a limited time, naming the recovery tool (queues_restore). It does not spell out when deletion is preferable to non-destructive alternatives, but the recovery path and cascade warning give strong selection context.

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