pipedrive_notes_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the destructive nature (requires confirm) and optional dry_run, but omits details like permanence, reversibility, or response behavior. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences with no redundant words. Every phrase adds value: action, confirmation requirement, dry_run support.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and partial parameter descriptions, the description covers the essentials but lacks detail on return values, error handling, or behavior after deletion. Sufficient for a simple delete operation but not fully comprehensive.

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 50%; description adds context for confirm (reinforcing const) and dry_run (clarifying support), but note_id is already described in schema and reason is left undocumented. Modest addition beyond schema.

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,' specifying the action (delete) and resource (note). It distinguishes from sibling tools like pipedrive_notes_get and pipedrive_notes_list by making the operation explicit.

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 mentions the requirement for confirm and support for dry_run, providing implicit usage context. However, it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., delete vs. update) or when not to use it.

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