delete_notebook

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

Beyond the destructive/idempotent annotations, it discloses the internal deletion order (pages first, then notebook), the absence of trash, the text-preservation write-back to the parent project/category note, and reliance on undocumented experimental endpoints pinned to app 1.71. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations can't convey.

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-loaded with the core action and information-dense with no filler, so every sentence earns its place. However the 'Two steps:' sentence is grammatically tangled and requires a re-read, slightly hurting clarity.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no prose. For a destructive, side-effect-heavy mutation, the description covers prerequisites, ordering, data preservation, and fragility — nothing an agent needs to call it safely is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema lacks: the conditional circumstances under which confirm must be true and what the first (non-confirming) call returns (title, size, first line). That materially changes how an agent sequences calls.

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 up front ('Delete a notebook and its pages permanently') and clarifies scope versus the page-level sibling delete_notebook_page. An agent knows exactly what is removed and that no trash/recovery path exists.

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?

Gives explicit conditions for when confirm=true is required (parented notebook with >1 page; standalone notebook with any text page) and describes the two-step confirm dance. It does not explicitly name alternative tools (e.g. delete_notebook_page) to route between, which keeps it short of a 5.

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