remove_task

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description explains that nothing is actually deleted, the task remains in Vikunja, and it becomes hidden from list_tasks. This adds meaningful behavioral context about side effects and reversibility.

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 tight sentences: the first states the core action, the second clarifies the non-destructive behavior and points to the undo tool. Every sentence earns its place, and the key distinction is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter tool with output schema present and annotations already covering idempotency/safety, the description fully covers the important context: what happens, what does not happen, and how to reverse it. No essential information 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 description coverage is 100% and the only parameter, task_id, is already described as a numeric task id. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, but none is needed given the schema is complete for a single simple parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('Mark') plus resource ('a task') and the exact mechanism ('attaching the configured removal label'). It clearly distinguishes itself from deletion and from restore_task, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings without ambiguity.

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 gives clear context: this tool hides a task from list_tasks without deleting it, and it names restore_task as the undo path. It implies when to use it versus alternatives, though it does not explicitly list exclusions or when another tool should be chosen.

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