delete_project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It thoroughly discloses the operation's behavior: the project is archived with status=deleted, sessions are left intact and ungrouped, and it requires owner access. It also explicitly states 'This never deletes any sessions,' which is important safety information.

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 long, front-loaded with the core action, and every clause adds value (soft-delete behavior, session impact, access requirement). No redundant information or filler.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers the action, side effects, permissions, and explicit exclusions (never deletes sessions). It provides sufficient context for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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% coverage for the single parameter, describing it as 'Project (workspace) ID'. The description repeats the workspace context but adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific action: 'Soft-delete a Harmonica project (workspace)' and distinguishes it from hard deletion by explaining it archives the project and leaves sessions intact. This differentiates it from sibling tools like update_project and get_project.

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 clear context on when to use the tool: it is a soft-delete that never deletes sessions and requires owner access. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, though the soft-delete nature implies the exclusion of permanent deletion.

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