tp_delete_note

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Delete', which is explicitly destructive, but fails to mention side effects (e.g., soft delete, cascading effects, permissions required). The lack of any behavioral context beyond the verb is insufficient.

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 extremely concise (4 words). While there is no fluff, it lacks substance. It is front-loaded with the action, but for a tool with parameters, it is too minimal to be effective.

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 the tool has two parameters (one required, without description), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits prerequisites, return behavior, and relation to sibling tools like tp_get_note. A simple delete tool still needs more context for correct invocation.

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 50% (athlete described, note_id undoc). The description adds no parameter-level meaning. It does not explain what note_id is or how to obtain it, nor does it clarify that athlete is for coach accounts. Since coverage is below 80%, the description should compensate but does not.

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 verb (delete) and the resource (calendar note). It distinguishes from sibling tools like tp_delete_event and tp_delete_workout by specifying 'calendar note', though it could be improved by clarifying the difference from workout notes given the presence of tp_get_workout_note.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to delete vs. not, or any prerequisites. The description is purely declarative with no usage context.

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