メモを削除

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses two important traits: login necessity and that only 'own' memos can be deleted. However, it does not disclose error behavior (e.g., if the memo ID does not exist or belongs to another user) or whether deletion is irreversible, which would be valuable for a destructive action.

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 short, front-loaded sentences. Each sentence provides essential information (action and scope, then prerequisite) without wasted words.

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 operation with two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core aspects: action, target, scope, and prerequisite. It lacks explicit mention of success/failure responses or edge cases, but given the tool's simplicity and absence of annotations, it is largely complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying the ID refers to 'your own' memo, which is not explicitly stated in the schema (schema only says '削除するメモのID'). It also reiterates the login requirement, tying the token parameter to a prerequisite. This adds value 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 '指定したIDの自分のメモを削除します' (deletes your own memo with the specified ID), using a specific verb (削除) and resource (メモ), and explicitly scopes to '自分の' (own). This distinguishes it from siblings like add_memo (create) and list_memos (read), offering no ambiguity.

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 indicates this is for deleting a memo and notes that login is required, which is a clear prerequisite. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or mention when not to use it, but since no other delete tool exists among siblings, the context is sufficient for selection.

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