delete_note

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

Beyond annotations which mark the tool as destructive and idempotent, the description adds the nuance of two delete modes (soft and hard). This clarifies the tool's behavior beyond what the annotations alone provide, though it doesn't cover potential cascading effects or restoration options.

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 with no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded and the parameter usage is concisely explained. Perfectly structured for quick comprehension.

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 simple delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects. However, it could mention related operations like restore_note for soft-deleted items, but this is not critical given the annotations and schema richness.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds meaning by explaining the role of 'permanent' and its default, providing practical guidance for the agent's usage.

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 (soft-delete) and the resource (QuickNote or Note), and distinguishes between soft and hard delete. It is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like archive_note or restore_note.

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 provides explicit usage guidance for the 'permanent' parameter ('Use permanent=true for hard delete'), but lacks explicit context on when to choose soft vs hard delete or comparisons to alternative tools. Despite this, the guidance is clear and actionable.

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