delete_anki_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('Delete') but lacks critical behavioral details: it doesn't specify if deletion is permanent, requires confirmation, affects associated cards, or has side effects. This is inadequate for a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by parameter hints in a structured 'Args:' section. It's efficient with minimal waste, though the parameter explanations could be more integrated into the flow.

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 a destructive tool with no annotations, 2 parameters at 0% schema coverage, and an output schema (which reduces need to describe returns), the description is partially complete. It covers the basics but misses critical context like deletion permanence, error handling, and integration with sibling tools.

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 description must compensate. It adds basic semantics: 'note_ids' is a list of IDs to delete, and 'anki_api_key' is optional for AnkiConnect. However, it doesn't explain ID formats, sourcing, or API key usage, leaving gaps for the 2 parameters.

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') and resource ('notes from Anki collection'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'update_anki_note' by specifying deletion rather than modification, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all alternatives like 'search_anki_notes'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing note IDs from search results) or warn against misuse (e.g., irreversible deletion). The context is implied but not stated.

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