planka_delete_task

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

With no annotations, the description must itself convey side effects. It only says 'delete', which implies removal but does not explicitly state irreversibility or any potential cascading effects. This is a minor gap for a destructive operation, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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, straightforward sentence without redundant information. It is concise and to the point.

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 operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential context. It does not mention preconditions (e.g., task must exist) but that is generally implied and not critical for such a simple operation.

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?

The only parameter 'taskId' is described as 'The task ID to delete', which fully explains its purpose and type. No further elaboration is needed.

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 verb 'delete' and the resource 'task', making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like 'planka_delete_card' without needing further clarification.

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 specifies the action and resource, which is sufficient for a delete operation. It does not explicitly compare with alternatives, but given the tool name and sibling context, usage is clear. It could have added a note about when to use it versus other task-related tools, but that is not necessary.

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