delete_issue_link

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description need not repeat that. However, it does not add any additional behavioral context such as whether the operation is reversible or affects related data. Annotations carry the burden here.

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?

Single sentence is concise but under-specified. Could be restructured to include key details without being verbose. No wasted words, but also no added value beyond a tautology.

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 operation, the description combined with schema and annotations provides minimal context. Lacks details about effects on linked issues or error conditions. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. It adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, earning a baseline score of 3.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'delete' and resource 'issue link', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create_issue_link' or 'list_issue_links'. However, it adds little beyond the tool name itself.

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 usage guidance provided. Does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives like 'delete_issue' or when not to use it (e.g., if link is referenced elsewhere).

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