delete_label

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description's mention of 'Permanently delete' and 'cannot be undone' reinforces this without contradiction. It adds value by clarifying that the label can be identified by ID or title, which is beyond the schema's generic 'a string that will be trimmed'. No contradictory information is present.

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?

The description consists of two concise sentences that deliver essential information without extraneous content. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function and behavior, making it highly efficient.

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 straightforward delete operation, the description covers the core aspects: action, permanence, and input flexibility. It does not detail return values or error conditions, but this is acceptable given the tool's simplicity and the presence of annotations indicating destructive behavior. A brief note on permissions or side effects would enhance completeness.

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 schema provides a single parameter 'label' with a minimal description ('a string that will be trimmed'). The tool description expands this by stating that it accepts 'label ID or title', giving meaningful context about how the parameter is interpreted. This adds value beyond the schema, though it could be more explicit about allowed formats.

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 action ('Permanently delete') and the resource ('label/tag definition'). It further specifies that the tool accepts both label ID or title, which adds precision. This effectively differentiates it from other delete tools targeting different entities.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, there is a 'preview_deletion' sibling that could be used to preview effects, and 'remove_issue_label' for removing labels from issues, but these are not mentioned. The tool lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios where deletion is appropriate.

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