delete_node

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive nature (delete) and the cascading effect on all edges touching the node. The explicit user-consent guardrail adds important behavioral context, though it does not mention irreversibility or error handling.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the primary action, scope, and usage constraint with no wasted words. It is an exemplar of concise, structured tool documentation.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core action, the critical side-effect (edges), and a usage guardrail. It is lacking only in parameter-specific detail, which is somewhat mitigated by the single obvious 'id' field, but overall it is adequately complete for its complexity.

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%, and the description does not explain that 'id' is the identifier of the node to delete. The description only says 'a node' without mapping to the parameter, leaving the agent to infer that id is the target. More explicit parameter semantics are needed given the schema lacks descriptions.

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 tool deletes a node and all touching edges, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_node, update_node, and link_nodes by focusing on deletion and cascading edge removal.

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 phrase 'Only when the user explicitly asks' provides a clear usage condition and implies not to use it proactively or without authorization. While it doesn't name alternatives, it implicitly distinguishes deletion from update or creation, giving sufficient context for when to trigger this tool.

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