Delete Node

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It doesn't state whether deletion is permanent or reversible, whether it requires specific permissions, what happens to referenced content, or what the return value is. 'Delete' implies destruction but nothing beyond that is disclosed.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no waste. Appropriately sized for the tool, though the brevity comes at the cost of missing behavioral detail.

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 destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no parameter documentation, the description is insufficient. Even with an output schema present, an agent needs to know about permanence, permissions, and side effects before invoking delete_node.

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 (nid) with 0% schema description coverage. The description says 'by ID', which clarifies the parameter's semantic meaning as an identifier, though it doesn't specify format (numeric vs. UUID). A single-parameter tool keeps the burden 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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (node) with the identifying parameter (ID). It's clear what it does, though it doesn't distinguish itself from sibling deletion tools like delete_term or delete_user beyond the resource name.

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 mention of alternatives (e.g., bulk deletion via clean_nodes_ai or node-specific considerations), and no exclusions. For a destructive operation this is a notable gap.

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