delete_issue_note

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

The description adds transparency beyond annotations by noting 'This is destructive and cannot be undone' and 'dry_run=true by default'. This complements the readOnlyHint=false annotation without contradiction.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second adds behavioral warning and default. No redundant words; information is front-loaded and concise.

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 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, destructive nature, and dry run guidance. Missing details about return value or post-action confirmation, but still adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description mentions dry_run default which is already in the schema, adding minimal extra value. Baseline 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 'Delete an existing issue note', specifying the verb and resource. The tool name and description together differentiate it from siblings like delete_epic_note and delete_mr_note.

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 warns that the action is destructive and cannot be undone, and mentions dry_run defaults to true, implying users should use dry_run first. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, though the name provides differentiation.

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