delete_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The explicit WARNING that the deletion 'permanently removes the note' provides a crucial safety-relevant behavior beyond the tool name, despite not mentioning side effects like backlinks or permissions.

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, front-loaded with the action, and includes a critical warning in just three short sentences. Every word contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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 two-parameter delete tool with a well-documented schema, the description is adequately complete. It states the action, the target, and the permanence, which is essential context. It doesn't address potential effects on backlinks, but this is not a major omission for such a tool.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptive definitions for both parameters (path, confirm), achieving 100% schema_description_coverage. The description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states 'Delete a note from the Obsidian vault,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'delete_file' by targeting notes specifically, though it doesn't explicitly name the alternative.

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 like 'delete_file' or under what circumstances deletion is appropriate. The warning 'Use with caution' is a caution, not a usage guideline.

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