deleteProjTask

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the batch deletion behavior and the ID concatenation. However, it does not explicitly mention the destructive nature (e.g., irreversible deletion) or potential side effects, though it is implied.

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 two sentences in Chinese, concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds necessary context without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description could mention expected return values or error handling. However, it adequately covers the tool's input constraints and prerequisite workflow. The overall context is sufficient for an agent.

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%, yet the description adds value by explaining how the tool processes the tasks array (concatenating IDs) and that parentId and taskName are optional for display. This goes beyond the schema's minimal 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 clearly states the tool is for batch deleting project tasks and provides the API endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like saveProjTask and updateProjTask, which are for save/update operations.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call queryProjectTask first and let the user select tasks. It also clarifies that task IDs must come from that query and that the tool concatenates multiple IDs into a comma-separated string.

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