delete_noteDelete a note permanently from the local OpenWhispr app. No confirmation or undo exists, so confirm with the user before calling this action.
Delete a note from the local OpenWhispr app. There is no confirmation step and no undo on this path, so confirm with the user before calling it. The bridge answers 204 without saying whether the id existed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| note_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses important behavior beyond the annotations: the operation has no confirmation/undo, and the API responds with 204 even if the note id did not exist, which is essential for the agent to set expectations.
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 brief, direct, and contains only necessary information. It front-loads the action and adds only high-value caveats.
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 simple delete operation, the description covers the action, the behavior on missing ids, and the lack of confirmation/undo. No output schema exists, so not describing return values is acceptable.
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 single parameter note_id is implicitly clear as the identifier of the note to delete, especially given the phrase 'whether the id existed.' The schema adds numeric constraints, but the description could explicitly state that note_id is the note's identifier.
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?
States the specific verb 'delete' and the resource 'note' in the context of the local OpenWhispr app, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_note, update_note, and get_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?
Provides critical usage guidance by warning that there is no confirmation step and no undo, and instructs the agent to confirm with the user before calling. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.