delete_work_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the two deletion modes (recycle bin vs permanent) and that project defaults. However, it does not mention permissions required, consequences for linked items (e.g., comments, attachments), or that recycle bin items can be restored. Partially transparent but gaps remain.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose, then a clean list of arguments. Every sentence provides value. No fluff or repetition. Highly efficient.

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 has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose and arguments well. It could be improved by mentioning what happens upon success or failure, or if there are any side effects, but it's largely complete for a deletion tool.

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 0%, so the description compensates well by explaining all three parameters: project (with default behavior), work_item_id (what it is), and destroy (boolean with default and effect). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema properties and defaults.

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 deletes a work item, with a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('work item'). It also distinguishes between moving to recycle bin and permanent destruction. Differentiates from siblings like update_work_item and create_work_item.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., update_work_item for state changes, or query_work_items for searching). It does not mention prerequisites or cautions. Usage is implied by the action, but lacks explicit context.

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