Skip to main content
Glama
arctop

Seamless

by arctop
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

notes_delete

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a note by ID, removing the markdown file from disk and its index row. Use only for duplicates, misfiled writes, or scratch notes, since no pointer remains.

Instructions

Delete a note by id: the markdown file leaves the disk and its index row goes with it. Permanent, and it leaves no pointer behind, so reserve it for notes that should never have existed -- a duplicate, a write into the wrong project, an agent's own scratch. To fix a note's content use notes_update, and to add to it notes_append; neither loses the artifact. A note tagged into a plan (plan:) is that plan's narrative for whoever inherits it, so read it with notes_read before deciding it is disposable.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesnote id (ULID)
sessionNothe session to act as: the name session_start returned, the cc/<id> or cx/<id> on your briefing's 'Seam session' line, or a session ULID. It scopes and credits this call. Defaults to this connection's session; pass it on every call when session_start reports the connection as stateless

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / session
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "the session to act as: the name session_start returned, the cc/<id> or cx/<id> on your briefing's 'Seam session' line, or a session ULID. It scopes and credits this call. Defaults to this connection's session; pass it on every call when session_start reports the connection as stateless",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description goes well beyond them by stating exactly what is destroyed (file + index row), that no pointer survives, and that the operation is permanent. The plan:<slug> warning about a note being another agent's inherited narrative is behavioral context no annotation conveys.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core action and its consequence before any caveats, and each sentence is load-bearing (mechanics, when-to-use, alternatives, plan caveat). It is on the denser side at four sentences, but none are filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description supplies the destruction semantics, permanence, sibling routing, and the special-case caution an agent needs before calling. Nothing material is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both the id (ULID) and the session parameter are already fully documented in the schema. The description says 'by id' but adds no format, validation, or session-scoping detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Opens with a precise verb+resource ('Delete a note by id') and immediately specifies the mechanism: the markdown file leaves the disk and the index row goes with it. It explicitly differentiates itself from notes_update and notes_append, so an agent can pick it without opening sibling schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('reserve it for notes that should never have existed -- a duplicate, a write into the wrong project, an agent's own scratch') and named alternatives with their conditions (notes_update to fix content, notes_append to add). It adds a further qualifier for plan-tagged notes plus a prerequisite read step, leaving nothing to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools