delete_note

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's 'Delete' aligns. However, the description does not add context beyond the annotation, such as whether deletion is permanent or if it affects related data. The idempotentHint=true annotation is not explained.

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?

At 4 words, the description is overly brief and fails to provide sufficient context. While concise, it sacrifices necessary information such as return behavior or prerequisites, making it minimally useful.

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 the simple input schema and lack of output schema, the description should at least explain what happens upon deletion (e.g., success, errors, side effects). It provides none of this, leaving the agent with significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 has 0% description coverage for the sole parameter note_id. The description does not explain what note_id represents, how to obtain it, or any format constraints, leaving the agent without critical usage details.

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 resource (Planhat note), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling delete_* tools by specifying the resource type, though it could further differentiate by describing what constitutes a note.

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 update_note or list_notes. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context for use, leaving the agent to infer based solely on the tool name.

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