notebook_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively communicates critical traits: the action is 'IRREVERSIBLE' (destructive), requires user confirmation via 'confirm=True,' and targets a specific resource ('Notebook UUID'). However, it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or rate limits, which would elevate it to a 5.

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 front-loaded with the core action ('Delete notebook permanently. IRREVERSIBLE. Requires confirm=True.') and uses a structured Args section for parameters. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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's complexity (destructive operation with 2 parameters), no annotations, and an output schema present (which reduces need to explain returns), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage, and parameters well but omits details like authentication needs or error cases, which could be beneficial for full context.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate fully. It does so by explaining both parameters: 'notebook_id' as 'Notebook UUID' and 'confirm' as 'Must be True after user approval,' adding essential meaning beyond the bare schema. This clarifies the purpose and constraints of each parameter effectively.

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'), target resource ('notebook'), and scope ('permanently'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like notebook_rename, notebook_describe, or notebook_list. It uses specific language that leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 'Requires confirm=True' and 'Must be True after user approval,' providing clear conditions for when to use this tool. It implies this is for irreversible deletion, distinguishing it from less destructive alternatives like notebook_rename or notebook_describe among siblings.

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