delete

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

The description states that the tool deletes a note and returns confirmation or error, but it does not disclose implications of the destructive action, such as permanence, recursive behavior, or required permissions. With no annotations, this is insufficient for a destructive tool.

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 and well-structured, with the action front-loaded and separate sections for args and returns. Every sentence serves a purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 low-complexity delete operation, the description covers the core action and parameter, but lacks crucial behavioral details like whether deletion is permanent, if it affects linked notes, or any recovery mechanism. Given the destructive nature, more context would be expected despite the simple interface.

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 description explains that 'path' is relative to the vault, adding meaningful context beyond the bare schema. Since the schema has no description for this parameter, this compensation is valuable and adequate for a single-parameter tool.

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 'Supprime une note' (deletes a note), which is a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like move or clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate them. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply describes the action without any mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or situations where another tool would be more appropriate.

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