delete_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It openly states that this is not a purge, that the note is kept for 30 days, that recovery is only via the app, and that the server cannot undo it. This gives the agent a clear picture of the tool's side effects and limitations. It does not mention error cases or permissions, but the core behavior is well covered.

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 efficiently front-loaded with the primary action ('Move a note to Recently Deleted') followed by a concise, essential caveat. It avoids redundancies and each sentence contributes meaningful value. The length is appropriate for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's purpose, its retention behavior, and the recovery path. It also clarifies that the operation is not irreversible from the server's perspective. There is no missing context that an agent would need to invoke it correctly.

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% for the single parameter, and the schema already describes note_id as 'The note's id, from list_notes or search_notes'. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so this aligns with the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 ('Move a note to Recently Deleted') with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes this from a purge, and the sibling tools include delete_folder and move_note, so the scope is clear. The description leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 clear context that this is a soft delete with a 30-day retention policy and recovery only through the app. It implies when to use it (when you want a recoverable delete) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. It does not explicitly route to another tool, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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