Github Delete Release

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds crucial nuance: the tag is preserved by default, delete_tag=True removes the ref the delete_tag tool would not, and the absence of a force flag is justified by the ordering (release deletion first) to prevent dangling releases. This is genuinely useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations.

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 compact and logically ordered: core action, default behavior, flag explanation, design rationale, then a workflow pointer. The #404 reference is a minor cryptic note, but it does not derail the message.

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 tool with a clear side-effect story, the description covers what gets deleted, under what conditions, and references a skill for deeper conventions. The output schema exists, so return-value detail is not needed. It could have mentioned irreversibility explicitly, but annotations already signal destructive, so this is a minor gap.

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 only 25% (only delete_tag has a description). The description enriches delete_tag semantics by explaining what it does to the tag and why, and it contextualizes tag_name as the release's published tag. The other parameters are straightforward from their names.

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 opening sentence 'Deletes a release' is a precise verb+resource statement. It further distinguishes itself from the sibling github_delete_tag by explaining the tag survives unless delete_tag is set, making the tool's scope 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 when delete_tag=True is appropriate and how it interacts with the sibling delete_tag tool, and it points to github_get_skill('release-management') for workflow conventions. It does not explicitly list all alternatives, but it gives enough context for the key decision between removing a release vs. a tag.

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