Delete Task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states the operation is permanent and destructive, and the warning adds context about history preservation. However, it doesn't mention permissions, side effects, or return behavior, though the key irreversible nature is well disclosed.

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 short sentences: purpose, warning, and required parameter. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 one-parameter destructive operation, the description is complete: states the action, emphasizes permanence, provides an alternative, and identifies the required parameter. No output schema exists, but none is needed for a straightforward delete.

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 a clear description for task_id ('The TaskId to delete'). The description only restates that task_id is required, adding no new meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Permanently delete' with resource 'task from Less Annoying CRM', clearly distinguishing it from edit_task and other task-related tools. The warning also reinforces its destructive purpose.

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 advises when not to use the tool: 'Consider using edit_task with is_complete=true instead to preserve history.' This provides clear alternative and exclusion guidance.

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