delete_epic

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It correctly indicates permanence and irreversibility, but lacks details about permissions, cascading effects (e.g., on associated user stories), or any recovery options. A score of 3 is appropriate for a basic disclosure.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of 5 words with zero wasted information. It is as concise as possible while conveying the essential action and caveat.

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's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is moderately complete. It covers the core action and permanence but lacks guidance on side effects or prerequisites. For a deletion tool, more context about impact on related data would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with the description 'epic numeric ID' for the only parameter 'epic_id'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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?

Description clearly states 'Permanently delete a epic' with the specific verb 'delete' and resource 'epic', and includes the critical nuance that it is irreversible. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'update_epic' or 'get_epic'.

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 warning 'This action cannot be undone' serves as an implicit guideline to use only when certain. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when the epic is obsolete or if there are dependencies.

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