Prune board tickets

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

Beyond annotations that mark destructiveHint=true, the description adds important behavioral context: deletion only occurs when confirm=true, non-existent IDs are reported non-fatally, and a dry-run preview is returned otherwise. This explains the guarded nature beyond the annotation alone.

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 concise sentences, front-loading the core behavior and then providing pairing advice. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the key behavioral aspects (guarded deletion, dry-run, non-fatal missing IDs) and cross-references a sibling tool. While there is no output schema, the description implies return values for dry-run vs actual deletion, making it sufficiently complete for a cleanup 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?

With 67% schema description coverage, the schema already defines 'confirm' and 'tickets'. The description reinforces that tickets are exact IDs and confirm gates deletion, adding 'non-existent ids reported non-fatally', which provides context 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Guarded cleanup: deletes ONLY the ticket ids you pass, and only when confirm is true (otherwise returns a dry-run preview).' It specifies the resource (tickets) and actions (delete or dry-run), distinguishing it from siblings like scan_board_cleanup.

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 guidance by mentioning pairing with scan_board_cleanup's suggestedRemovals and explaining the dry-run vs actual deletion use. It implies the tool is for specific cleanup tasks, but does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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