Remove a note from a Wanderlog trip

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

The description fully discloses behavioral traits: case-insensitive matching, exact match vs multiple matches vs no match outcomes, and the optional day filter. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and meets it well.

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 concise (4 sentences) and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, then details matching, multiple match handling, and optional filter. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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 absence of an output schema, the description explains the outcomes: deletion, no match error, multiple match previews. It does not specify the exact format of the preview or success response, but it is largely complete for the tool's complexity.

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 schema already describes each parameter, but the description adds context about case-insensitivity, the nature of the text substring, and the day format ('day 2', 'May 4', ISO). This enriches the parameter semantics 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?

The description clearly states that the tool removes a note block from a Wanderlog trip by matching a substring of its text content. The verb 'removes' and resource 'note block' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like wanderlog_add_note (adds) and wanderlog_edit_note (edits).

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 explains the matching behavior (case-insensitive, substring), how to handle multiple matches (supply more specific substring), and the optional day filter. It does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is clear for the intended use.

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