notebook_delete

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

The description adds significant value beyond annotations: it explains the irreversible nature, the return format with partial failures, the need for authentication, and the browser visibility option. Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, so the description aligns and expands with concrete behavioral details.

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 efficient: first sentence states the main action, then return format, followed by bullet-pointed use cases and warnings. No redundant or unnecessary sentences. Each part earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (bulk deletion, partial failures, irreversible), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, how to use it (via notebook IDs from list), return structure, use cases, warnings, and authentication. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to document return values, but the description still explains the format adequately.

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 100%, with each parameter described in the schema. The description restates the notebook_ids parameter's source and format, and clarifies the show_browser default. This adds marginal value over the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'Delete one or more notebooks directly from NotebookLM (UI-level deletion, not just from the local library).' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from other deletion operations by specifying the scope. This is a clear and precise purpose statement.

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 use cases: bulk-cleanup, freeing quota, and removing outdated notebooks. It warns about irreversibility and suggests user confirmation. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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