Projects Delete Project Phase

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so 'Destructive' adds little on its own. The genuinely additive content is the confirm=True gating requirement, which appears nowhere in the schema (confirm is an undescribed boolean with default false) and is essential to a successful 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?

A single tight sentence with the destructive nature and the confirm gate front-loaded. Zero filler, nothing wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the risk profile plus the confirm requirement cover the essentials. For a two-ID delete, the definition is complete enough to invoke safely.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description only clarifies the confirm parameter and leaves project_id and phase_id unexplained. Those two names are largely self-evident and accept int-or-string, so the gap is modest rather than crippling.

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 project phase'), which cleanly separates it from sibling deletes like projects_delete_project and projects_delete_assignment. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the resource scoping makes selection unambiguous.

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 only guidance is the parenthetical prerequisite 'requires confirm=True', which tells the agent how to invoke but not when to choose this over update/other phase operations. No exclusions or warnings about deleting phases that still hold assignments or subtasks.

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