delete_project

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

The description only says 'delete', implying a destructive action, but does not disclose whether the deletion is reversible, what happens to tasks within the project, or any required permissions. With no annotations, the description fails to provide sufficient behavioral context.

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 is extremely concise (five words), but it sacrifices necessary detail for conciseness. While no extra words are wasted, the brevity leaves out important context, making it only partially effective.

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 lack of an output schema and annotations, and the simplicity of the operation, the description is insufficient. It does not explain consequences, response behavior, or side effects, which are critical for an agent acting autonomously.

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 has 100% description coverage; the project_id parameter is already documented. The description does not add further meaning beyond confirming the resource type. Baseline score 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?

The description clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (a Todoist project). It is specific enough to distinguish from other delete tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like delete_section or delete_task.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as archiving a project or removing a project. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions for deletion.

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