delete_task

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'move to trash' but does not clarify if the operation is reversible, what happens to subtasks or attachments, or if any permissions are required. Minimal disclosure.

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?

Very concise—two lines. Front-loaded with the key action. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness (e.g., mentioning that the task is not permanently deleted).

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 low complexity (1 required param, no enums), the description is partially adequate. It identifies the parameter but lacks context on side effects, return value, or interaction with other tools. An output schema exists but is not detailed in the description.

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 0%, so the description should compensate. It adds 'Task UUID' to the parameter, but this only clarifies the parameter's purpose minimally. No format hint or additional context beyond the schema's 'string' type is provided.

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 ('Move a task to the trash') and the resource ('task'). It effectively communicates the core function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'cancel_task' or 'complete_task', relying on the name for distinction.

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 (e.g., cancel_task, complete_task). There are no prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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