zotero_delete_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it clarifies this is a soft delete (Trash), that items are recoverable, that permanent deletion requires emptying the Trash in the UI, and that notes are protected by default with an explicit override. This is unusually thorough 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?

Four sentences, all substantive, with the primary action first and the most important caveats (note safety, recoverability) immediately following. No filler or repetition.

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 description covers scope, safety, recovery, and permanent deletion, and an output schema exists so return values need not be described. It leaves a small ambiguity about whether 'any item type' includes annotations and doesn't mention the delete_annotation sibling, but the core call path is fully specified.

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 100%, so item_key and allow_note are already documented. The description adds behavioral meaning by stating that notes are refused by default and allow_note=True overrides that safeguard, which goes slightly beyond the schema's phrasing.

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?

Description opens with a specific action and object: 'Move a Zotero item to the Trash.' It also scopes the tool by item type and immediately distinguishes it from note deletion, so an agent can tell it apart from delete_annotation and delete_collection without inspecting schemas.

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 says 'For notes, use zotero_delete_note' and explains the default refusal with allow_note override. This is strong routing guidance, though zotero_delete_note does not appear in the provided sibling list, so the referenced alternative may not be selectable by the agent.

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