Delete a notebook

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

Description adds 'permanently' to the destructive hint already provided by annotations, clarifying irreversibility. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Extremely concise with two short sentences, front-loaded with action, every word adds value.

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 one required parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know (permanence and destructiveness).

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 already describes the 'notebook' parameter as 'Notebook UUID.' with 100% coverage; description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Permanently delete a notebook', which specifies the action (delete) and resource (notebook), distinguishing it from sibling notebook tools like create, list, raw, and rename.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives; usage is implied by name and description. Does not exclude cases or recommend other tools.

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