Delete milestone

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

With only idempotentHint in annotations, the description carries the burden and delivers: runs/cases survive but lose the association, downstream release reporting breaks, the action is irreversible, the user is prompted for confirmation first, and it costs one API call (~0.4s). These are concrete behavioral facts beyond anything in the annotations, and they are consistent with idempotentHint=true.

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, front-loaded with the action, then consequences, then operational cost. No sentence is filler; each adds decision-relevant information.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description covers irreversibility, side effects on related entities, confirmation behavior, and cost — everything an agent needs to invoke it safely.

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 both parameters (code, id) are already documented with patterns and constraints. The description only restates 'by project code and ID' and adds no format or validation nuance, which is the baseline case.

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?

States a specific verb (delete) and resource (milestone) scoped by the two required identifiers, which cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling qase_milestone_upsert. An agent can route here without opening the schema.

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 clear context for when this matters (milestones that release reporting is built on) and notes a confirmation prompt will occur, which informs the decision. It does not explicitly name an alternative or state exclusions, so it falls short of the top score.

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