Delete Custom Field Value

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

The description repeats the destructive nature already declared in annotations (destructiveHint=true) without adding further behavioral context (e.g., irreversibility, required permissions). With annotations present, the description adds minimal value beyond the caution emoji.

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—two sentences with no wasted words. The caution is front-loaded and prominent, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Despite being a simple delete operation, the tool has 6 parameters including a confirmation flag. The description fails to explain the role of 'confirm' (must be set to True) or the optional parameters. With no output schema, more explanation of behavior is needed.

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 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning or context for parameters, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 the resource ('custom field value'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'delete_defect' or 'delete_launch' by specifying the resource type.

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 only a caution about destructiveness but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'delete_unused_custom_fields' for bulk deletion). No explicit context for appropriate usage is given.

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