Delete task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete a task' is extremely sparse and does not mention irreversibility, potential cascading effects (e.g., subtasks), authentication needs, or what happens to the task in shared lists. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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 concise sentence that is perfectly front-loaded and contains no filler. However, it is perhaps too minimal, sacrificing important context for brevity. It earns full marks for efficiency but loses a point for under-specification.

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 complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is critically under-informative. It does not explain return values, side effects, or how the tool interacts with task lists. For a mutation tool, this is a major gap, as the agent has no information about outcomes or prerequisites beyond the raw parameter list.

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%, with each parameter (taskId, account, tasklistId) having a basic description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but since the schema fully documents parameters, the baseline of 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Delete a task.' This is specific enough to convey the core function and distinguish it from task creation or completion. However, it lacks any scope or reference to the task ID, and does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like google_tasks_complete, which also modifies a task.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states the action without mentioning prerequisites (e.g., obtaining taskId from list), when to prefer delete over complete, or any context about which task list applies. This leaves the agent without decision support.

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