delete_note

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one valuable trait: the deletion is recoverable via undo in the app. However, it omits permissions required, whether undo has a time limit, and what happens to notes referenced elsewhere, leaving meaningful gaps for a mutation tool.

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 short sentence with the operation front-loaded and a parenthetical qualifier; nothing is padded. It could have used one more clause for the id or prerequisites without becoming bloated.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action and its reversibility, which is the main thing an agent needs. It still leaves the parameter identity and failure behavior unexplained, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 single 'id' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate — but it never says what the id identifies (note id vs. board id) or its format. It adds no meaning beyond restating the operation on 'a note'.

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?

'Delete a note' states a specific verb and resource, clearly distinct from the sibling tools list_notes, add_note, and update_note. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings or stating scope, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to delete versus update, no prerequisites (e.g., ownership/permission), and no statement about behavior when the id is invalid or already deleted. Usage is only implied by the verb.

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