delete_note

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

While annotations already set destructiveHint=true, the description adds critical context: the deletion is permanent, content is not recoverable, and it returns what was removed. This warns about irreversibility and the need for confirmation beyond the annotation's binary hint.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every clause earns its place. The caution and verification guidance are placed logically without waste.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no nested objects, has output schema). The description covers what the tool does, the consequence, and the necessary verification pre-step. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 covers the only parameter note_id with a clear description 'Id of the note to delete'. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. The description refers to the parameter as `id` but adds no new format or semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 'delete' with a specific resource 'note' and the return behavior 'return what was removed'. It distinguishes from siblings like create, get, list, update by naming the destructive action unambiguously.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use this tool: confirm the id with list_notes or get_note before calling when the note was identified by description. This directly addresses potential misuse and surfaces the appropriate alternative behavior.

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