systemprompt_delete_notion_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively communicates the permanent nature of deletion ('cannot be undone'), which is crucial for a destructive operation. However, it doesn't mention permission requirements, rate limits, or what happens to linked content beyond the page itself.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place: the first states the action and scope, the second provides the crucial warning about irreversibility. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by emphasizing permanence and caution. However, it could be more complete by mentioning permission requirements or what the tool returns (e.g., success/failure confirmation). The high schema coverage helps compensate somewhat.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the single parameter (pageId) with its type, description, and warning. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score when schema coverage is high.

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 the specific action ('permanently deletes') and resource ('a specified Notion page and all its contents'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, get, list, search, and update operations. It precisely communicates the destructive nature of the operation.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('use with caution') due to its irreversible nature, but doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives. It implies usage for deletion scenarios but lacks explicit guidance on alternatives like archiving or moving content.

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