notlai_delete_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully explains the key behavior: notes are moved to the root and not deleted. This prevents the agent from assuming notes are lost. It does not mention whether the folder must be empty, but that is implied by the move behavior. No contradictions with any annotations (none present).

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?

Two sentences: first defines the action, second explains the consequence and provides a reference tool. Perfectly concise with no redundant information.

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 single-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential: what happens to contents, how to obtain the ID, and the core action. It is complete for the tool's 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 provides 100% coverage with a description for folderId. The tool description additionally reinforces the source of the ID (from notlai_list_folders) and the ID format (ULID), adding value beyond the schema alone.

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 a folder by ID), explains the side effect (notes moved to root, not deleted), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning folder-specific behavior. It also references a sibling tool (notlai_list_folders) for obtaining IDs.

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 advises using notlai_list_folders to get folder IDs, which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool (e.g., if notes should be permanently deleted instead), nor does it mention prerequisites like permissions. Still, it provides clear context for its primary use.

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