deleteBookmark

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 states the action is a deletion but doesn't cover critical aspects like whether this requires specific permissions, if deletions are reversible, what happens to associated data, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with just three words, making it front-loaded and efficient. However, it borders on under-specification given the tool's complexity, as it could benefit from slightly more detail to clarify scope or behavior without becoming verbose.

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 deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the deletion process, potential side effects, error conditions, or return values, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool safely and effectively.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the schema (e.g., 'Bookmark ID' for 'id', 'Permanently delete (skip trash)' for 'permanent'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for adequate coverage without extra value.

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 'Delete a bookmark' states the basic action (delete) and resource (bookmark), making the purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about scope (e.g., single vs. batch) and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'batchDeleteBookmarks' or 'deleteCollection', leaving ambiguity about when to use this particular tool.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'batchDeleteBookmarks' for multiple deletions or 'emptyTrash' for cleanup, leaving the agent to infer usage context without explicit direction.

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