jira_sprint_delete

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

The description discloses irreversibility and the confirmation guard, which are critical behavioral traits not evident from the schema alone (no annotations). It also specifies the return format (YAML {status: ok}) and notes the CLI equivalent. This adds value beyond the input schema, though it could also mention any side effects like sprint deletion affecting issues.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately cover the most critical detail (irreversibility and confirmation). Every sentence is essential and well-structured.

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 operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key points: what it does, the safety guard, the return value, and even a CLI reference. No essential information is missing.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions sprint_id and confirm but does not add new semantics beyond what the schema provides. It reinforces the confirmation requirement but doesn't clarify sprint_id's origin or format.

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 'Delete a JIRA sprint (by sprint_id)' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly identifies the action and the required identifier, making it easy for an agent to understand what the tool does. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, the action is unique and unambiguous.

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 explains that the operation is irreversible and requires confirm: true to proceed, otherwise the tool refuses and makes no API call. This provides clear usage context and preconditions. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but the irreversibility warning implies caution.

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