Xray Delete Folder

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: subfolders are deleted recursively while the Test/Precondition issues inside are preserved, which an agent could otherwise get wrong. Permissions and irreversibility are not restated, hence not a 5.

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 sentences with zero filler; the destructive scope is front-loaded and the preservation caveat follows immediately. Every clause earns its place.

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 explained, and annotations plus full schema coverage carry the rest. The description covers the two facts an agent most needs for a destructive folder operation (recursion and issue preservation); only permission requirements are unstated.

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% for all three parameters (path, project, test_plan), including the '/' root convention and the repository-vs-test-plan distinction. The description contributes nothing beyond the schema, 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 and resource ('Delete a folder') plus the destructive scope ('and its subfolders'), which clearly separates it from siblings like xray_create_folder, xray_rename_folder, and xray_move_folder. It never names an alternative explicitly, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as xray_remove_from_folder (which detaches rather than deletes) or xray_move_folder. No prerequisites or preconditions are given, leaving the agent to infer the selection context.

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