delete-onenote-page

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds a crucial detail that the deletion is permanent and irreversible, which is not redundant. It does not contradict annotations. The description also does not mention potential side effects like cascading deletions, but given the annotations, the added permanence tip is valuable.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single declarative sentence plus a short tip. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every word earns its place with no extraneous information.

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 tool is a straightforward destructive operation with annotations covering safety and a schema fully detailing parameters. However, it lacks usage guidance (when to delete versus other actions), which is a notable gap for an agent selecting among many OneNote-related tools. The lack of an output schema is acceptable since it is a delete operation, but the missing usage context prevents a higher score.

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% coverage, with all five parameters (confirm, If-Match, onenotePageId, includeHeaders, excludeResponse) described. The description adds no parameter-level information, so it neither compensates nor detracts. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Delete a OneNote page.' The tip adds that it is permanent and cannot be undone, which further clarifies the exact intent. It is distinct from other sibling tools that target different resources (e.g., delete-calendar, delete-onedrive-file).

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, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context for deletion. There is no reference to other OneNote operations (like moving a page or creating a page) that an agent might consider instead. The tool name and schema imply usage, but explicit guidance is absent.

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