notebook_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the permanent, irreversible nature, notes that NotebookLM has no trash/undo, and specifies the return value, adding meaningful context beyond the action itself.

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 concise sentences that front-load the action, provide the return value, and add a critical warning. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 single-parameter delete tool, the description covers the essential behavioral context: the irreversible action, the confirmation requirement, and the expected return. The output schema presumably documents the response structure, and the absence of detailed error handling is acceptable for this complexity.

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 has 0% description coverage for the only parameter, notebook_id, and the description does not explain its format, origin, or constraints. The parameter is self-descriptive, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, such as referencing notebook_list.

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 uses a specific verb 'Delete' and a clear resource 'a notebook', specifying 'permanently' to distinguish it from any soft-delete or other notebook operations. Sibling tools like notebook_create and notebook_list are clearly different operations.

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 deletion is irreversible and requires caller confirmation, implying it should only be used after user consent. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or specify prerequisites like listing notebooks to obtain the ID, so it stops short of a full 5.

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