Delete Test Plan

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context by stating 'Permanently removes' and explaining the idempotent behavior (returns success if not exist), reinforcing the safety profile without contradicting annotations.

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?

Description is extremely concise: two sentences and a caution emoji. It front-loads the purpose and is free of redundant or irrelevant information.

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 annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description adequately covers purpose and behavioral traits. However, it omits mention of the confirm parameter which is a safety measure, and does not specify the return format or success message.

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?

Input schema covers all parameters with 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for the parameters.

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 test plan and permanently removes it from Allure TestOps, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_test_plan and update_test_plan by focusing on deletion.

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 includes a caution about destructiveness and notes idempotency, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like delete_test_case or manage_test_plan_content. The confirm parameter safety measure is not mentioned in the description.

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