jira_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral transparency burden. It highlights destructive and irreversible nature, the confirm guard as a safety mechanism, and the return YAML format, providing complete disclosure beyond basic 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?

The description is three sentences, front-loading the core action and destructiveness. Every sentence conveys essential information without redundancy or fluff.

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 delete tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary context: operation, destructive guard, return format, and even a reference to the underlying command. No gaps remain.

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?

Input schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds value by explaining the confirm guard's purpose as a destructive safety net and the return format, which goes beyond the schema's parameter definitions.

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 it deletes a JIRA issue with the specific verb 'Delete' and resource 'JIRA issue', distinguishing it from sibling tools like jira_create or jira_read. The emphasis on destructive and irreversible nature reinforces its unique purpose.

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 explicitly requires `confirm: true` to proceed, serving as a clear usage guideline. It implies when to use (when deletion is intended) but does not mention alternatives like transitioning to a closed status, leaving slight room for improvement.

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