Move a project to the trash

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

The annotations already mark this as destructive and idempotent, but the description adds important behavioral details: the 30-day restore window, that Aldine itself does not permanently delete data, and that the provisioned GitLab repository is deleted while a restore provisions a new one. It also discloses ownership and agentCreated refusal conditions.

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 front-loaded with the core action, followed by side effects, refusals, and usage guidance. Despite its density, every sentence carries decision-relevant information for an agent.

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 one-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the key concerns an agent needs: restore behavior, external GitLab repository deletion, refusal conditions, and when to invoke versus avoid the tool. The annotations are consistent with the description.

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 schema already explains that 'project' is a required project id from list_projects or create_project with no scoped-token fallback. The description reinforces the lifecycle context but does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: moving a project to the trash. It also distinguishes this from create_project and list_projects by naming the lifecycle stage and the source of the project id.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('scratch projects the user asked you to throw away') and when not to use it ('never on your own initiative'). It also names refusal cases and an alternative action: asking the user to delete person-created projects in Aldine.

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