delete_note

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

The description discloses that deletion cascades to children, which is useful. However, there is no mention of whether the operation is irreversible, required permissions, or any side effects. No annotations are provided to supplement this.

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 a single sentence that immediately conveys the action and scope. It is concise and front-loaded, though it could be more descriptive.

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 simple nature of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description lacks information on return values, error handling, or differences from sibling tools like archive_note. The agent may be uncertain about behavior and prerequisites.

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 has 0% description coverage (despite the parameter having a 'Note ID' description, the signal indicates no meaningful coverage). The tool description does not clarify the format or source of noteId, adding no value beyond the schema. Without compensation, the score is low.

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 verb (delete), the resource (a note), and the scope (including its children), and specifies the platform (Slite). This differentiates it from sibling tools like archive_note and update_note.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, there is no mention that archive_note might be for soft deletion or that this is irreversible. The implied usage is for permanent removal, but no explicit context or exclusions are provided.

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