jira_worklog_delete

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It discloses irreversibility, the safety-gate refusal behavior ('without it the tool refuses and makes no API call'), and the return format ('Returns YAML `{status: ok}`'). This is exemplary transparency 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 compact sentences: first states the action and parameters, second covers the critical safety behavior, third states the return format and CLI mirror. Every sentence carries essential information; no filler.

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 delete tool with no output schema, this description is complete: it covers purpose, required identifiers, prerequisite source of the ID, irreversible confirmation, refusal behavior, return value, and a CLI equivalent. Nothing essential 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantic value by telling where to find worklog_id ('from `jira_worklog_list`') and by explaining that `confirm: true` is required and that false causes refusal without an API call.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a JIRA worklog (by `key` + `worklog_id`)'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like jira_worklog_add, jira_worklog_update, and jira_worklog_list.

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?

It explicitly instructs the agent to obtain the worklog id from `jira_worklog_list` and explains the confirmation requirement ('pass `confirm: true` to authorise'). This gives clear when/how guidance and names the associated sibling tool.

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