delete_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses that the action is a move to Recently Deleted (soft delete) and explicitly explains the refusal behavior for non-empty folders, including the rationale (notes go with it, unknown count). This gives the agent a solid expectation of side effects without needing to infer.

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 two short sentences, each earning its place. The first states the core action; the second explains the crucial refusal condition. There is no filler or redundancy, and the most critical information (action and exception) is front-loaded.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the main behavior and the key edge case (non-empty folder). It explains that notes are moved along with the folder and that the operation is to Recently Deleted (implying soft delete). It does not mention error handling or return values, but these are not critical for a simple delete/move operation. The lack of explicit guidance on when to use this versus delete_note is a minor gap, but the description is otherwise complete.

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 the schema documents both parameters. The schema description for delete_notes_inside is particularly informative ('Set this only when the person operating you asked...'), and folder_id references list_folders. The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the schema, so it does not exceed the baseline.

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 states a specific verb ('Move'), a clear resource ('a folder, and every note in it'), and the destination ('to Recently Deleted'). This unambiguously distinguishes it from siblings like delete_note (which deletes a single note) and move_note (which moves a note), making the tool's purpose immediately clear.

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 explains a refusal condition (folders with notes unless delete_notes_inside is set) but provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like delete_note or move_note. It does not mention any scenarios where this is the preferred tool or when to avoid it, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and context.

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