clickup_task_delete

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: destructive, irreversible, cascading deletion of all subtasks, comments, checklists, attachments, time entries. Also states return value (empty object). No contradictions.

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?

Three concise sentences: action description, warning with alternative, and return value. No extraneous information. Front-loaded with key purpose.

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 single parameter, 100% schema coverage, no output schema, the description provides all essential information: what is deleted, return type, and user confirmation requirement. Slightly lacking in prerequisites or authorization details, but sufficient for 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 coverage is 100% with detailed description of task_id and its cascading effect. The description reinforces this but does not add new parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states it permanently deletes a ClickUp task including subtasks, comments, etc. It uses strong action verbs and distinguishes from the sibling clickup_task_update by explicitly offering an alternative for marking done without deleting.

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?

Explicitly instructs to confirm with user before calling due to destructive nature, and provides an alternative tool (clickup_task_update with closed status) for non-destructive completion. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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