delete_task

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

Annotations already indicate destructive=true, and the description adds that deletion is permanent and requires explicit confirmation. This provides useful safety context about irreversibility and user consent. No contradiction with annotations; readOnlyHint=false is consistent with the write operation.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the confirmation requirement is the only additional essential detail.

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, the schema and annotations together cover the required IDs, the confirmation mechanism, and destructiveness. The description adds permanence and consent. There is no output schema, so omitting return-value details is acceptable. Minor gaps like behavior on nonexistent tasks are not critical.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, and each parameter is already well documented: task_id and task_list_id explain where to obtain them, and confirm explains the const=true requirement. The description adds no new parameter details beyond reinforcing the confirmation requirement, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('a task'), with 'Permanently' adding important scope. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like complete_task, delete_task_list, and clear_completed_tasks, so an agent can select it correctly without opening schemas.

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 gives a clear precondition: explicit confirmation is required before calling. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling operations (e.g., using complete_task instead of deletion, or delete_task_list for removing an entire list), so usage guidance is only implied rather than fully spelled out.

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