notes_delete_tag

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It clearly states two important behavioral facts: the deletion is permanent, and it removes the tag from all notes. This goes beyond the basic delete operation and communicates irreversible scope and cascading effects, which is valuable for an agent deciding whether to execute the action.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds critically important behavioral detail about permanence and scope. Every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter delete tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description covers the essential operational context: how to identify the tag (by slug), the permanent nature, and the scope of the removal. It does not mention edge cases like non-existent tags or idempotency, but those are likely covered by the output schema, and the description is otherwise complete for correct invocation.

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% and the parameter is already well-documented in the schema ('Slug of the tag to permanently delete'). The tool description adds that deletion is by slug and references list_tags as the source, which slightly reinforces the schema but does not introduce significant new meaning. A baseline 3 is appropriate given the strong schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Delete a tag by slug') and clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like notes_delete_note, which deletes a note, and notes_update_tag, which would modify an existing tag. An agent can immediately identify the tool's scope and function.

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?

The description implies the tool is used when a tag must be deleted by its slug, and it notes the permanence of the action. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives such as notes_update_tag (e.g., when you want to rename rather than delete) or notes_list_tags for finding slugs. The context is implied but not fully spelled out.

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