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. It discloses irreversibility, permanent cascading deletion across layers including the linked GitHub issue, deletion order, and the permission requirement. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context an agent needs before invoking a destructive operation.

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 dense sentences with no filler. The critical warning 'PERMANENTLY' and 'Irreversible' are front-loaded, and the alternative tool is named in the same sentence as the warning. Every clause earns its place.

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 operation's scope, side effects, permission needs, and the safer alternative. With a complete input schema and an output schema present, there is no significant missing context for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 schema already explains all parameters. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 names the specific verb ('Permanently delete') and resource ('a task and its GitHub issue'), and further clarifies scope ('from every layer, deepest-first'). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling close_task, which is exactly the alternative an agent might confuse it with.

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?

Explicitly states the key alternative: 'to just mark a task done, use close_task instead.' It also gives a hard precondition (token needs delete-issue permission, repo admin/triage) and a strong signal that this is not for routine completion.

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