Delete Story Task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly warns 'IRREVERSIBLE' and specifies the required confirmation flags (confirm_delete=true and confirm='CONFIRM_WRITE'), which is essential for a destructive operation. It could add more context about side effects (e.g., what happens to the story) but covers the primary risk well.

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 extremely concise: two sentences (or three clauses) that front-load the purpose and then state critical safety requirements. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or 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 destructive deletion tool with no annotations and low schema coverage, the description provides essential safety information (irreversibility, confirmation) but leaves gaps. The 'dry_run' parameter is unexplained, and there is no mention of what the tool returns or how errors are handled. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 low (40%), so the description should compensate. It only references the confirmation parameters, which the schema already describes. It fails to explain the remaining parameters, particularly 'dry_run', which is not obvious. The description adds little value beyond what the schema already communicates.

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 tool's action: 'Delete a checklist task from a Shortcut story.' This uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like delete_story, delete_story_comment, and delete_story_link. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention other tools like update_story_task or delete_story, nor does it specify situations where this tool should or should not be used. The only instructions are about required confirmation parameters, which are more about execution than usage context.

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