Delete Request

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral load. It usefully discloses the trash-vs-permanent distinction, implying force is irreversible. However it says nothing about required permissions, whether child notes/tasks are cascaded, or the operation's result, which matters for a destructive mutation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste; the core action and the consequential modifier are both captured immediately.

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 mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the mode difference well but omits permissions, cascade/side effects, and any pointer to restore_request as the reversal path. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It does explain what 'force' does (permanent vs trash), which compensates for the undocumented boolean, but gives no detail on request_id format or accepted types.

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 ('trash'/'permanently delete') and resource ('a request'), and the two modes distinguish it from related tools like delete_request_note or delete_request_task. An agent can tell what it does 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 implies usage via the force flag (default = trash, force = permanent), but never states when to use this versus restore_request or when trashing is preferable. No explicit preconditions or exclusions are given.

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