Delete task

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and non-read-only behavior, but the description adds context by specifying permanence, permission requirements, and the confirmation message response. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 deliver all necessary information: action, target, permissions, and return type. No redundancy or filler, making it efficiently front-loaded and scannable.

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 single-parameter destructive operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects: what is deleted, who may do it, and what the response contains. The tool is simple enough that no further detail is required.

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% with the 'id' parameter described as 'Task UUID to delete'. The description repeats this without adding new semantic detail, so it does not exceed the baseline expected from high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Permanently delete') and resource ('a task by its UUID'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_task_comment and delete_task_worklog. The scope is unambiguous and directly maps to the tool's function.

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 states permission prerequisites (task creator or board OWNER/ADMIN), which tells the agent when the tool is usable. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, leaving a slight gap in guidance.

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