Permanently deletes a Microsoft Planner task after user confirmation. Use it to remove obsolete or incorrect tasks from a plan by task ID.
Permanently delete a Planner task. Confirm with the user first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| task_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is partially covered. The description adds value by emphasizing that deletion is permanent and by requiring user confirmation, though it does not describe cascading effects or permissions.
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 two short sentences with zero wasted language. The permanence warning is front-loaded, and the confirmation instruction follows immediately.
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 one-parameter destructive action whose annotations already declare destructive and open-world behavior, the description covers the essential context: permanence and user confirmation. It leaves minor gaps around task ID format and side effects, but no output schema is present and the tool is structurally simple.
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?
The single parameter task_id has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain its format, source, or constraints. Mentioning a Planner task implies the ID type only weakly and does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.
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 and resource: permanently delete a Planner task. It distinguishes the tool from siblings such as planner_delete_plan, planner_delete_bucket, and todo_delete_task by naming the Planner task resource explicitly.
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 one explicit procedural guideline: confirm with the user first. It does not explain when to choose this tool over alternatives such as planner_update_task or when deletion should be avoided, so usage guidance is only minimally viable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.