delete_entity_comment

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so 'Delete' adds nothing about safety. The description does not mention that a confirm flag is required to proceed, whether deletion is permanent/recoverable, or how the notify/notifyAuthor flags behave, which are the meaningful behavioral gaps for a destructive op.

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?

A single efficient sentence with no wasted words, and the primary action is front-loaded. It is concise, though thin rather than optimally informative.

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 mutation with no output schema and only 33% parameter coverage, the description is too sparse. It omits the confirmation requirement and the notification flags that materially affect how the tool is called, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 description coverage is only 33% (only confirm and entityType are documented), yet the description adds no parameter detail at all. It restates the entity types but says nothing about entityId, commentId, notify, or notifyAuthor, so a third of the params remain undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a comment') plus the scope of entities it applies to (project, portfolio, goal), which is useful. It does not, however, say how it differs from the sibling delete_comment, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus delete_comment or update_entity_comment, and no prerequisites or conditions are stated. The agent must infer applicability from the entity-type scope alone.

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