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

The description states the deletion behavior, but adds little beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false indicates mutation). There is a contradiction: annotations set destructiveHint=false while the description implies destruction, reducing trust.

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 concise sentences: the first front-loads the core purpose, the second adds bulk support details. No wasted words.

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, the description is fairly complete given the annotation context. However, it lacks error conditions, return values, and side effects. With many sibling tools, more context could reduce ambiguity.

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 0%, so the description partially compensates by mentioning bulk support with notebook_ids and note_ids. However, individual parameter meanings and required fields are not explained.

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 'Apaga uma nota' (delete a note), providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling note tools (create, get, list, rename) by explicitly indicating deletion.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use delete vs. other note operations). The bulk support mention is helpful but does not address use cases or exclusions.

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