taiga_delete_wiki_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the single most important trait, that deletion is irreversible and permanent. It says nothing about what is destroyed alongside the page (comments, attachments, children), whether confirmation or elevated permissions are required, or how a missing slug is handled.

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 short sentences, zero filler, and the destructive nature is front-loaded. It is arguably under-sized for a zero-annotation destructive tool, but nothing is wasted.

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 destructive operation with no annotations, no output schema, and two fully undocumented parameters, the description is too thin: it omits confirmation/permission expectations, cascade effects, and the meaning of project_id. An agent can call it, but risks calling it against the wrong page.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only clarifies that the page is identified by slug and never mentions project_id, its role in scoping the lookup, expected slug format, or ID source.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Permanently delete a wiki page') plus the identifying key ('by slug'), which cleanly separates it from taiga_update_wiki_page and taiga_create_wiki_page. It does not explicitly name a sibling or scope, but the action is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus updating or archiving a page, no prerequisites, and no warning about verifying the target before calling. The only implicit signal is the word 'Permanently', which the agent must interpret on its own.

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