Remove items

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

It reveals an important two-phase behavior: the first call only returns a cascade preview and token, and only the second call performs the deletion. This goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining how the destructive action is gated and previewed.

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 sentences cover purpose, target types, and the required two-call workflow with no filler or redundant restatement of the schema. The core action is front-loaded.

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?

Given the destructive annotation and presence of an output schema, the description supplies all essential invocation information: what is deleted, how the preview/token handshake works, and that the second call is the executing one. No critical step is left to inference.

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 input schema already describes ids and confirm_token thoroughly, but the description adds the workflow that binds them: ids initiate the preview, and the returned token is required to execute deletion. This provides meaning beyond the schema's standalone field descriptions.

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 opens with a concrete verb and resource: 'Delete tasks, projects, or folders.' This makes the tool's intent unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools like complete_items, move_items, or duplicate_items, which operate on the same item types but do not delete them.

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 clearly establishes the use case: removing tasks, projects, or folders. It does not explicitly name exclusions or alternative tools, but the delete vs. move/complete/duplicate distinction in the sibling list makes the intended context obvious.

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