delete_space

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'permanently' which implies irreversibility, but does not explain what is destroyed (e.g., all tasks, folders, lists within the space), whether confirmation is required, or any side effects. The transparency is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 a single concise sentence that conveys the core action without extraneous words. However, it may be too terse, lacking necessary context. It earns its place but could be expanded without becoming verbose.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema) and absent annotations, the description provides the minimum viable information. It identifies the action and resource but omits important context such as prerequisites, consequences, and return behavior. Acceptable but with clear gaps.

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 description coverage is 100% as the only parameter 'space_id' is described as 'Space ID.' The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond that. Baseline is 3 due to high coverage; no extra value is provided.

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 resource (Space) with the qualifier 'permanently.' It distinguishes from sibling delete tools by specifying the resource type, though it lacks detail about scope (e.g., associated content). It is specific but not exceptionally informative.

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 (e.g., archive or soft delete). There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions. The description is purely operational, leaving the agent to infer usage from context.

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