Delete a source

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

The description says 'Destructive', which is already indicated by the destructiveHint annotation. It does not disclose additional behavioral traits like cascading effects, permission requirements, or irreversibility beyond the annotation.

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 very concise with two short sentences. While efficient, the second sentence is redundant with annotations; however, it is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 a simple delete operation with good annotations and schema, the description is functional but minimal. It does not mention return values or side effects, but the complexity is low.

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 already describes both parameters (source and notebook UUIDs) with 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning or context to these parameters, meeting the baseline but not enhancing understanding.

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 ('Remove a source from a notebook') with a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like artifact_delete by mentioning the notebook context.

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 no guidance on when or when not to use this tool, such as prerequisites (e.g., using source_list to get UUIDs) or alternatives. It is a bare minimum statement.

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