Github Delete Tag

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, it discloses a specific failure mode (refusal without force), the workaround (force), and the underlying consequence (release left without the code it names). This materially supplements the annotation context.

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?

Two short paragraphs front-load the core purpose, then provide the critical edge case and a terse pointer to workflow guidance. No filler or redundancy.

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 destructive tag deletion with an output schema and destructiveHint, the description covers the key behavioral hazard and workflow route. It is only held back by the undocumented required identifier parameters.

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 only 25% schema description coverage, the description was responsible for compensating, but repo_owner, repo_name, and tag_name are left entirely to naming conventions. The force parameter is effectively restated from the schema, so no substantive semantic value is added beyond it.

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 'Deletes a tag,' a specific verb and resource that clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from siblings like github_create_tag, github_list_tags, and github_delete_release. The added release-points nuance does not blur the 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?

It gives a clear condition: a tag a release points at is refused unless force is set, explaining why. It also points the agent to github_get_skill('release-management') for workflow conventions, though it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives.

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