delete_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only 'Delete a note by id,' which essentially restates the tool name and the action. It does not mention that the operation is irreversible, whether it fails on non-existent ids, or what the return value is. This is minimal disclosure for a destructive action.

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 a single, clear sentence with no filler. The key information (delete action and id) is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise for such a simple operation.

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 has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description must cover basic runtime behavior. It does not mention whether the action is permanent, how errors are reported (e.g., 404 for missing id), or the response format (success vs. empty). This leaves the agent uncertain about expected outcomes.

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 must compensate for the schema's lack of detail. The description says 'by id' but does not explain that 'id' refers to the note ID obtained from list_notes or get_note, nor any format or range constraints. With a single integer parameter, the description should at least clarify its origin, which is missing.

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 the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'note' precisely, with the id as the target. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_note and update_note by its destructive action. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other delete-like operations or mention cascading effects, so it's not a perfect 5.

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?

Usage context is implied: use this tool when you want to permanently remove a note. There is no explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., when you only need to fetch or modify), nor any reference to alternative tools like get_note or update_note. The description leaves the decision to the agent's inference.

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