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. While it mentions 'Auto-fetches ETag' (which hints at concurrency control), it doesn't address critical aspects like required permissions, whether deletion is permanent/reversible, error conditions, or what happens upon success. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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—two short sentences with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose ('Delete a Planner task') and adds only essential behavioral context ('Auto-fetches ETag'), making it highly efficient.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on permissions, side effects, return values, error handling, and how it differs from siblings like 'update-task'. The 'Auto-fetches ETag' hint is helpful but doesn't compensate for the broader contextual gaps.

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 the single parameter 'taskId' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides (e.g., format examples or constraints), so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without adding value.

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 specific action ('Delete') and resource ('a Planner task'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create-task', 'get-task', and 'update-task'. It provides a complete verb+resource combination that leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update-task' or 'create-task', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing task ID) or exclusions. It simply states what the tool does without contextual usage information.

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