delete_draft_note

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, signaling deletion and potential external effects. The description adds no further behavioral details such as irreversibility, cascading impacts, or permission requirements. Since annotations carry the burden, the description contributes minimal value.

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, succinct sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, contains no extraneous information, and is appropriately sized for a straightforward deletion 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of annotations and a well-described schema, the description is minimally complete. However, it lacks contextual hints (e.g., that draft notes belong to merge requests) and does not address the permanence of deletion beyond the destructiveHint annotation, which is already present.

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 has 100% description coverage for all three required parameters (project_id, merge_request_iid, draft_note_id), so the schema already provides full parameter semantics. The tool description does not augment this information, resulting in no added value. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 draft note'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, get, list, update, and publish draft notes. However, it does not explicitly mention that draft notes are tied to merge requests, which is evident from the schema but not from the description alone.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other deletion tools or update/publish draft notes). There is no indication of prerequisites, limitations, or situations where deletion might be inappropriate, leaving the AI agent without context for tool selection.

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