delete_note

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 says nothing about irreversibility, whether the deletion is soft or hard, permission requirements, or error behavior for a nonexistent id.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Terseness here is efficiency rather than padding, though the brevity borders on under-specification for a destructive tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a one-parameter destructive tool with zero annotations and zero schema description coverage, the description is missing the irreversibility and permission context an agent needs to invoke it safely.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema gives no format or source hints for note_id. The description adds that the id identifies the note to delete, but no format, origin, or example, so it only marginally compensates for the coverage gap.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('a note') with the keying parameter identified. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like update_note or get_note, but the destructive verb makes the distinction inferable.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no exclusions. There is no warning that this is a permanent removal versus a soft delete, and no mention of what the caller needs to have done beforehand (e.g. obtaining the note_id).

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