delete_projects

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses destructive behavior ('permanently delete', 'cannot be undone') and cascading deletion of tasks. This adds significant behavioral context beyond the schema, though it omits details like permissions or error handling.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences and a param note, with no wasted words. Key information is front-loaded, including the permanent and cascading effects.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one param, destructive action), the description covers the main purpose, consequence, and parameter. It could mention the output schema (exists but not described) and potential errors, but it is reasonably complete for a deletion tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds useful clarification: it specifies 'project_ids' as a string or list of strings and marks it required, which supplements the anyOf schema definition. However, it does not explain the meaning or constraints further.

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 the verb 'permanently delete' and the resource 'projects and all their tasks', including the irreversible nature. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_tags and delete_tasks.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., archive vs delete, or other deletion tools). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are given.

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