delete_milestone

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool performs a deletion but doesn't mention whether this action is reversible, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., affecting associated issues), or provides confirmation feedback. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loaded with the essential action and resource.

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 destructive nature, lack of annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address critical aspects like behavioral consequences, parameter details, or expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and use the tool safely.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the single parameter 'milestoneId' is undocumented in the schema. The description adds no information about this parameter—what format it expects, where to obtain it, or examples. With low coverage and no compensation in the description, this falls below the baseline.

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 action ('Delete') and the resource ('a GitHub milestone'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from other deletion tools like 'delete_automation_rule' or 'delete_project' beyond the resource type, which prevents a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_milestone' or 'archive_project_item', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., needing milestone ID from 'list_milestones' or 'get_milestone_metrics'). It simply states what the tool does without contextual usage information.

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