todo_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool deletes a todo snapshot, implying a destructive mutation, but fails to mention critical details like whether the deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., affecting related data). This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's function without any wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action and target, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature (implied by 'Delete'), lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral risks, return values, or error conditions, which are crucial for safe and effective use. This falls short of the needed context for a mutation tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'snapshot_id' clearly documented as 'Todo snapshot ID to delete'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or sourcing instructions, so it meets the baseline for adequate but unenhanced parameter semantics.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('a specific todo snapshot by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'context_delete' or 'todo_restore', which prevents a perfect score, but the specificity of 'todo snapshot' helps distinguish it from general context operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'todo_restore' (which might handle undo operations) or 'context_delete' (which deals with different data). There's no mention of prerequisites, such as needing the snapshot ID from 'todo_list' or 'todo_get', leaving usage context implied at best.

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