delete_endnote

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

The description fully explains the effects: removing the endnote from endnotes.xml and the endnoteReference run from the document body. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and meets it well.

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 concise and well-structured: the first sentence gives the main purpose, followed by a blank line and detailed effects and parameters. No wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to cover return values. It covers purpose and behavior adequately. However, it could mention prerequisites like the document being open or the endnote existing, but this is a minor gap.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds value by specifying 'numeric ID of the endnote to delete.' This clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's type-only definition.

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 an endnote and its in-body reference.' It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like add_endnote, get_endnotes, and update_endnote.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not mention that this tool should be used only when an endnote is to be permanently removed, nor does it reference related tools like validate_endnotes or update_endnote for conditional use.

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