Delete Note

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true), the description adds irreversibility, return value (plain-text confirmation), error conditions (note not found or permission denied), and access control explanation. No contradictions.

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 short paragraphs plus a prerequisites line. Front-loaded with core action and irreversibility. Every sentence adds information without redundancy or fluff.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and presence of annotations, the description covers action, return value, error cases, and prerequisites. It is sufficient for an agent to understand usage and expected outcomes.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying how to obtain parameter values (from list_notes or get_issue), which provides necessary context beyond schema descriptions.

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 (permanently delete a note), the resource (a note from a MantisBT issue), and emphasizes irreversibility. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_note, list_notes, and delete_issue.

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 clear context for when to use (deleting a note) and prerequisites (obtain note_id and issue_id from list_notes or get_issue). Mentions access control limitations but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives.

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