expunge-note

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

Without annotations, the description bears full burden. It only states 'permanently delete note' but omits critical behavioral details: required confirmation parameters, irreversibility, effect on linked resources, or error conditions. The agent receives insufficient transparency for 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?

At four Chinese characters, the description is extremely concise, but it lacks structure and omits necessary context. While no text is wasted, the brevity undermines informativeness for a complex destructive tool.

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?

Given three required parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and a destructive action, the description is severely incomplete. It provides no context about parameter usage, behavior, or outcomes, making it inadequate for reliable tool selection.

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% and the description adds no explanation of the three parameters (guid, confirm, confirmGuid). Their roles (e.g., confirmGuid likely as a safety check) are completely undocumented, leaving the agent to guess.

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 '永删笔记' clarifies that the tool permanently deletes a note, matching the tool name 'expunge-note' and distinguishing it from the sibling 'delete-note' (likely soft delete). However, it doesn't explicitly state this differentiation or provide English text, which may reduce clarity for non-Chinese agents.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete-note' or prerequisites (e.g., confirmation requirements). The description only implies permanent deletion, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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