google_tasks_delete_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Delete a task' which implies a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent or reversible, authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens to subtasks. This leaves significant gaps for safe agent operation.

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 extremely concise with zero wasted words—a single verb-noun phrase that front-loads the core action. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 complexity (destructive mutation with 2 parameters) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects, error handling, or output expectations, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool safely and effectively.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, such as format examples or constraints. Since the schema fully documents the parameters, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, but no extra value is provided.

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 task'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'google_tasks_delete_tasklist' by specifying the resource type. However, it doesn't specify the scope (e.g., from Google Tasks API) or differentiate from non-sibling deletions like 'google_calendar_delete_event'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing task ID), when not to use it (e.g., for archiving vs. deletion), or direct alternatives like 'google_tasks_complete_task' for marking tasks as done without deletion.

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