delete_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors beyond the schema: dependency checking, prevention of deletion when dependencies exist, and automatic cache invalidation. This is substantial transparency for a delete operation, though it does not detail return values or error handling.

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 composed of three short, front-loaded sentences, each contributing specific information (action, dependency check, cache invalidation). There is no wasted wording, making it both concise and well-structured.

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 parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential context: what it does, a critical safety behavior, and a side effect (cache invalidation). It does not mention return values or error scenarios, but those are arguably less critical for a basic delete tool with dependency safeguards.

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% (id has a description 'Task ID to delete'). The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Per the baseline rule, a score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb 'Deletes' with a clear resource 'task'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like safe_delete_tasks_by_status by noting it checks for dependent tasks and prevents deletion if dependencies exist, which is a unique behavior not present in other task-related tools.

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 implies a usage context: use this tool for deleting a task when you need dependency safety. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as safe_delete_tasks_by_status. The dependency-check behavior provides context but no exclusions or explicit alternative recommendations.

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