Delete Note

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable context: deletion is permanent, irreversible, and notes bypass trash (unlike tasks). This goes beyond raw annotations but doesn't cover other potential behaviors like side effects on related items.

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?

A single sentence front-loaded with 'CONFIRMATION REQUIRED' and packed with all essential info. No wasted words, perfectly sized for the operation.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key points: permanence, irreversibility, no trash. It doesn't address error cases or preconditions, but those are less critical given the simple scope.

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?

Only one parameter (note_id, uuid) exists, and the schema is self-explanatory. The description doesn't mention it explicitly, but 'this Note' ties it to the resource. With 0% schema coverage, the description adds no extra meaning, though the simplicity of the parameter makes this acceptable.

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 ('delete this Note') with specific scope ('Note'), and emphasizes 'Permanently and irreversibly' plus 'Notes do not use Trash', distinguishing it from archive/restore and trash-related tools among siblings.

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?

It provides clear context: notes have no trash, so this is the permanent deletion path. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like 'archive_note' for recoverable removal, but the no-trash statement strongly implies when to use vs avoid. Minor lack of explicit exclusions.

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