delete_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that deletion is permanent, that detach=True removes connected edges (like DETACH DELETE in Cypher), and that detach=False fails if edges exist. It also describes return value (confirmation or error) for both success and failure cases.

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 concise with a clear structure: a one-line summary, usage guidelines, args section, returns section, and examples. Every sentence adds value and there is no fluff.

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 tool with 2 parameters (1 required) and an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does, when to use it, parameter details, return value, and examples. It is complete and leaves no gaps.

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 description must compensate. It explains node_id as the ID of the node, and detach as controlling edge removal behavior with its default (True). Examples illustrate usage, adding meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 action (delete a node) and the resource (node in graph). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by saying 'do NOT use for updating properties (use update_node) or deleting edges only (use delete_edge)'. This provides specific verb+resource differentiation.

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 explicitly states when to use (remove a node permanently) and when not to (updating properties, deleting edges only) with alternative tool names. It also covers the detach parameter's behavior, giving clear context for decision-making.

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