clickup_task_delete

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 effectively describes the tool as 'destructive, irreversible, and cascading,' specifies what gets deleted (task plus all subtasks, comments, etc.), and notes the return value ('empty object on success'), covering critical behavioral traits beyond basic functionality.

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 efficiently structured with three sentences: the first explains the action and scope, the second provides critical warnings and usage guidelines, and the third clarifies the return value. Each sentence adds essential information without redundancy, making it front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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 (destructive deletion with cascading effects), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, behavioral risks, usage alternatives, parameter context, and return value, providing all necessary information for safe and correct use.

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 the task_id parameter thoroughly. The description does not add any additional meaning or context about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, such as format or validation details, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('permanently delete') and resource ('a ClickUp task'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying it deletes all subtasks, comments, checklists, attachments, and time entries. It explicitly differentiates from clickup_task_update for marking tasks done without deletion.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('confirm with the user before calling') and when not to use it (offering clickup_task_update with a 'closed' status as an alternative for marking tasks done without deletion). It also mentions prerequisites by referencing where to obtain the task_id.

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