Delete Microsoft To Do List

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

Beyond the `destructiveHint` annotation, the description adds critical behavioral context: deletion is permanent and irreversible ('cannot be undone'), and it cascades to all tasks inside the list. It also includes a safety mandate to confirm with the user. This is relevant for mutation tools and goes far beyond the annotation's minimal signal.

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 concise sentences deliver purpose, critical safety warnings, and cascade behavior without any filler. The most important information (permanence, irreversibility, user confirmation) is front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what is deleted, the irreversible nature, and the confirmation requirement. Given the simplicity of the operation and the presence of robust annotations, no further details (e.g., success response) are necessary.

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 single parameter `list_id` is fully described in the schema ('The id of the list to delete (from todo_list_task_lists)'), providing source hints and clear meaning. The tool description does not add further parameter detail, so the schema carries the burden; a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Permanently delete a Microsoft To Do task list AND all tasks inside it'), specifies the resource (task list), and highlights cascade deletion. The scope ('all tasks inside it') distinguishes it from sibling `todo_delete_task`, which deletes only a single task.

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 a clear usage constraint: 'Confirm with the user before calling this.' It implicitly tells the agent to get consent before invoking the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., when to use `todo_delete_task` instead), so it falls short of a perfect 5.

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