forget

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for a destructive operation. It does not state whether the deletion is irreversible, whether it requires confirmation or specific permissions, or what happens if the id is invalid or already deleted.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the action and scoping, with the id-source hint in a tight parenthetical. Nothing is wasted.

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?

It is a simple single-parameter operation with no output schema to explain, and the id source is covered, so the core is complete. However, for a deletion tool with zero annotations, the absence of any irreversibility or side-effect context leaves a real gap.

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 0%, so the single 'note_id' parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description compensates partially by explaining it is a note id and that 'recall' lists valid ids, but adds no format or range detail.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete one note from my notebook by id'), which is unambiguous despite the metaphorical name 'forget'. It also names the sibling 'recall' as the way to obtain ids, giving partial sibling differentiation, though it does not contrast against 'remember' or 'assign'.

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 parenthetical '(recall lists them)' implicitly tells the agent where to get the required id and thus when this tool applies. There is no explicit when-not guidance or alternative named for the delete operation itself.

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