ruddur_delete_waypoint_note

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the specific authorization scope (content.manage) beyond what annotations provide, which is useful. However, it does not mention irreversibility or other behavioral nuances, though the annotations cover the core safety profile.

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 the primary action front-loaded and the critical scope requirement immediately following. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The schema and annotations provide essential details such as the confirm flag and destructive nature. However, the description does not mention behavior when the note does not exist, whether deletion is permanent, or the expected response. For a simple delete operation, these gaps are moderate, but a brief note about outcome would improve completeness.

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 schema descriptions cover all top-level parameters (100% coverage), including a detailed explanation of the confirm parameter. The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific information, but the schema handles this responsibility adequately. The nested noteId lacks a description but is self-explanatory.

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 the action (Delete) and specific resource (Waypoint note), distinguishing it from sibling delete tools like ruddur_delete_waypoint and ruddur_delete_heading. It also includes the required scope, making the purpose unambiguous.

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. It only mentions the permission requirement, but does not explain context, prerequisites, or cases where another delete tool would be more appropriate.

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