tp_delete_note

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('delete') without revealing consequences such as permanence, side effects on comments, or required permissions. The description adds no context beyond what the tool name already implies.

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 a single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it is slightly under-specified, as it could have added a hint about parameters without significant bloat.

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 delete operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse to be considered complete. It does not mention irreversibility, related data (e.g., comments), or any constraints. Even simple tools benefit from clarifying that deletion is permanent. The description offers no additional context beyond the tool name.

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 only 50% — the required 'note_id' parameter lacks any description in the schema. The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving its format or purpose implicit. The optional 'athlete' is described in the schema, but the description does not compensate for the undocumented 'note_id'.

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') and resource ('a calendar note'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like tp_delete_workout or tp_delete_event. The term 'calendar note' disambiguates from workout notes, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies when to use the tool (when you want to remove a calendar note) but provides no explicit guidance on alternatives or exclusions. There is no mention of related tools like tp_update_note or tp_delete_event, so usage context is only inferred from the action itself.

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