Delete Test Plan

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context by stating 'Permanently removes' and explaining idempotent behavior ('if the plan does not exist, it returns success'), enhancing transparency beyond 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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the action, uses a caution emoji for emphasis, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple deletion tool with a safety confirm parameter, the description covers core behavior, permanence, and idempotency. It does not mention permissions or cascading effects, but given the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, it is mostly complete.

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% with all three parameters described. The description does not add parameter-specific information beyond the schema; e.g., it doesn't mention the confirm safety flag. Baseline 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 'Delete a Test Plan' with the verb 'Delete' and resource 'Test Plan'. It further clarifies with 'Permanently removes the Test Plan from Allure TestOps', distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_test_case or delete_launch.

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 caution about destructiveness and mentions idempotency, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., manage_test_plan_content, update_test_plan) or when not to use it.

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