zotero_delete_annotation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses that the operation is a soft delete (recoverable) and details the only way to make it permanent, which is critical behavioral information beyond what the schema could convey. This adds meaningful value.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the core action front-loaded and the recovery nuance as a supporting clause. Every word earns its place.

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 is simple (one parameter) and has an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the action, the recoverable nature, and how to achieve permanent deletion—enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 the description should compensate. It does not explain annotation_key beyond what the name and context imply, but since there is only one parameter and it is self-evident from the tool name, the omission is not critical. Still, a brief note on the key format would have been more helpful.

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 a specific verb (move), resource (Zotero annotation), and destination (Trash), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like zotero_delete_item or zotero_delete_collection. The mention of recoverability adds precision about the action's effect.

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: it is for trashing an annotation with recovery in mind, and it explains how to achieve permanent deletion via the Zotero UI. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to infer appropriate use cases.

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