delete_release

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does it well. It discloses that the action is irreversible ('This action cannot be undone'), specifies what is deleted ('release and its attached files'), and clarifies what is not deleted (Git tag). This covers the essential behavioral traits for a destructive 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?

Three concise sentences, each earning its place. The primary action is front-loaded, the boundary about Git tag is useful, and the irreversibility warning is critical. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 deletion tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what is deleted, irreversibility, and what remains (Git tag). It lacks explicit error conditions or permission requirements, but these are not critical for a well-specified delete 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 schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only slight reinforcement by stating 'Identified by release UUID', which aligns with the releaseUuid parameter but does not enrich the semantics of owner or project 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?

The description has a specific verb ('Permanently delete') and resource ('a release and its attached files'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_branch or delete_webhook. It also clarifies a key boundary ('does not delete the associated Git tag'), leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 an explicit exclusion ('This does not delete the associated Git tag'), which helps the agent decide if this tool is appropriate when a Git tag is involved. However, it does not name alternatives (e.g., delete_tag) or state prerequisites like permissions, so it stops short of full when-to-use guidance.

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