reminders_delete_task

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds meaningful context beyond them: the operation is irreversible ('permanently') and gated on a human approval workflow, which is behavioral context the annotations do not convey.

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?

Two short clauses with the destructive verb and the approval requirement front-loaded, plus a compact version/permissions tag. No wasted prose, though it is terse to the point of omitting guidance.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and annotations plus the approval note cover the safety profile. For a destructive write gated on human approval, this is nearly complete, though it omits any reference to the idempotency/approval-key mechanics that the schema documents.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents id, _approvalId and _idempotencyKey thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Permanently delete a reminder'), and 'permanently' distinguishes it from softer alternatives like reminders_complete_task. It does not explicitly name a sibling, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

Mentions that deletion requires 'human approval', which implies a precondition for calling it. However, it gives no explicit when-not guidance (e.g., use reminders_complete_task to mark done rather than delete) and no alternatives, leaving usage largely implied.

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