delete_project

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the action. No annotations are provided, so it should describe permanence, side effects (e.g., cascade deletion), or authorization needs. It merely states 'Deletes a project' without elaboration.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it could be more informative without losing conciseness, e.g., adding a note about irreversibility.

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?

For a simple delete tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information about return values, confirmation, or the effect of the operation. The sibling tools suggest other CRUD operations, but no context on project hierarchy or dependencies is given.

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 baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond the schema's descriptions. The description does not indicate parameter relationships or selection criteria.

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 'Deletes a project' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (project), matching the tool name. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_project' and 'update_project' by implying a destructive action, but does not explicitly differentiate from other delete tools.

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 vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, permissions, or scenarios where other tools (e.g., update_project) might be more appropriate.

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