delete_note_by_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses an important safety behavior: nothing is actually deleted unless confirm_delete=True, despite the tool's name. It also implies bulk deletion by saying 'notes' rather than 'a note.' It could be more explicit about irreversibility or behavior when confirm_delete is false, but the key destructive guard is revealed.

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 sentences with no filler. The destructive action and the safety gate are front-loaded, and the optional category scoping is included efficiently.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no per-parameter schema descriptions, the description covers the core semantics and the mandatory safety flag. The output schema presumably covers return values. A small gap is not stating what happens when confirm_delete=False, such as whether it is a no-op or returns matching notes.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: keyword means 'containing' text, category limits the scope, and confirm_delete controls whether removal actually happens. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema types and defaults.

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 a specific verb ('Delete') and a specific resource ('notes containing a given keyword'), and adds an optional category scope. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_category and the read-oriented search_notes/suggest_similar_notes.

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 gives clear context for when the tool is appropriate: deleting keyword-matched notes, optionally filtered by category. It also surfaces the critical prerequisite confirm_delete=True for actual removal. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the keyword-based scope is sufficient for routing.

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