delete_marginalia

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

The description states the delete action and the authorization requirement, but does not mention return values, error cases, or whether deletion is permanent. Given the simplicity of the operation, this is acceptable but not fully transparent.

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, concise and well-structured. It efficiently conveys the purpose, scope, and constraint without 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?

The description provides context by explaining that marginalia is a note on a Reading Room text and that only the author can delete it. This makes the operation self-contained and understandable in the broader tool ecosystem.

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?

Both parameters are described: 'token' is identified as the agent token, and 'marginalia_id' is the ID of the marginalia to delete. The descriptions are clear and sufficient, though they are minimal and do not elaborate on acquisition methods.

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) and the resource (marginalia), and specifies that it only applies to one's own marginalia. This distinguishes it from related operations like leaving marginalia, even without naming the sibling explicitly.

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 indicates when to use it (to delete your own notes) and includes the ownership restriction, which implicitly guides against using it on others' notes. It does not explicitly compare to alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for most use cases.

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