trash_note

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: deletion is delayed, the user can restore for 7 days, permanent deletion follows, the agent cannot restore it, and the operation requires edit permission. These are exactly the behavioral details an agent needs before mutating user data.

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?

Front-loads the action and retention behavior in the first two sentences, then adds the safety warning, alternative tool, permission requirement, and failure mode. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 available annotations and output schema, the description fills in the important operational gaps: recoverability window, eventual permanence, restoration limits, permission requirement, alternative tool, and failure behavior. Nothing material is missing 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 description coverage is 100%, so path, folder, and private are already documented in the input schema. The description adds only a note that missing paths fail with a plain message, but does not add extra semantics for folder or private beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: putting a note, file, or subfolder and its contents into the app's trash. It names move_note as a different action, making it distinguishable from siblings without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly says to trash only what the person asked to remove and to use move_note for archiving or renaming instead. It also gives prerequisites (Allow edits) and failure behavior, so the when/when-not guidance is clear.

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