Jobs-tools-knowledgeBase-deleteGuideNote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly warns that deletion is irreversible and that links are removed, which are critical side effects. However, it does not explain the exact nature of 'remove its links' or potential error states, leaving some gaps.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the primary action, includes a parenthetical danger warning, and contains no unnecessary words. Every element earns its place in a highly compact structure.

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 tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), and the description communicates the core destructive behavior and irreversibility. It omits details about error conditions or the full impact on linked notes, but for a delete operation, the coverage is largely sufficient.

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 already provides 100% coverage of the single parameter noteId, described as 'Guide note ID to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already supplies, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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), the target resource (guide note), and a key side effect (remove its links). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like archiveNote or deletePage, making the tool's 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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as archiveNote or deletePage. It warns that the action is irreversible but does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or cases where an alternative should be preferred.

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