delete_task

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 explicitly warns that the operation is irreversible ('この操作は取り消せません'), which is a crucial behavioral trait. However, it does not mention other potential side effects or permission requirements, leaving some room for improvement.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates both the action and a critical caveat. It avoids unnecessary details and is perfectly sized for a simple delete operation.

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 delete tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the core action and adds an important irreversibility warning. However, it does not specify the return value or error behavior, which is a minor gap.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single required parameter 'task_id' with a clear description of its purpose. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 with a specific verb '削除します' (deletes) and the resource 'タスク' (task), making the purpose unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like create_task, update_task, and get_tasks, effectively distinguishing itself as the delete operation.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or mention alternatives. Usage is implied by the verb 'deletes', and the warning about irreversibility provides some context, but there is no guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to update_task or other siblings.

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