Delete stories

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

Although the annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, the description goes well beyond them: it discloses the cascading element deletion, the pre-resolution of references, the invariant that one story must remain, index shifting, and the keepLevels elevation trade-off. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before an irreversible operation.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the destructive scope warning is the first clause, followed by the usage gate and the dryRun recommendation. Long, yet almost every sentence carries a distinct constraint or return-shape detail.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description compensates by enumerating both return shapes (the results/movedStories/stories/warning object and the dryRun object). Combined with annotations and full schema coverage, nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it clarifies why dryRun should be run first, what [2, 3] resolves to, and how keepLevels changes the elevation of remaining stories. That is more than a restatement of the schema text.

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 (deletes) and resource (stories) and immediately scopes the blast radius: 'AND EVERY ELEMENT whose home story they are.' This distinguishes it from delete_elements and delete_hotlinks by explaining the cascade semantics rather than just the target.

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 an explicit gating rule ('Use ONLY when the user explicitly asks to delete stories') and a prescribed workflow ('Run with dryRun: true first'). It does not name a sibling alternative for element-only deletion, but the when-to-use condition is unambiguous.

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