delete_milestone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Delete' but does not mention that deletion is destructive, permanent, or what happens to references to the milestone. It also omits permission requirements and possible cascade effects.

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 a single, concise sentence with no filler. The action and object are front-loaded, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is simple, with two fully documented parameters, so basic invocation is well-defined. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits what happens on success or failure, whether the operation is irreversible, and any permissions or preconditions needed.

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 project_id and milestone_id are already explained in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which is acceptable given the full schema coverage, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 milestone from a GitLab project'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is easily distinguished from sibling commands like get_milestone, create_milestone, edit_milestone, or promote_milestone.

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 intended use is implied by the action 'Delete a milestone', but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or pointers to alternatives such as edit_milestone for modifications or list_milestones for finding milestone IDs. Basic usage context is clear, but no exclusions or routing are provided.

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