Delete Notes Batch

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

The description 'stable per-item outcomes' adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true), suggesting that each item's deletion result is independent and possibly partial failure is handled gracefully. This complements the destructive hint without contradicting it.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose. It avoids verbose language and gets straight to the point. However, it may be too terse given the complexity of the operation, but that is more a completeness issue than a structure issue.

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 batch delete operation with nested item structures, the description is notably sparse. It does not address error handling, permission requirements, maximum batch size (schema allows up to 100), or return values. Given there is no output schema, the description should provide more context about what the agent can expect, but it doesn't.

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 provides no explanation of the parameters 'profileId' and 'items'. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate, but it doesn't mention what these parameters represent or how they relate to the deletion. The agent is left to infer from the schema structure alone, which is insufficient.

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 ('Delete') and the resource ('multiple notes'), with the additional qualifier 'stable per-item outcomes' hinting at batch-specific behavior. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'delete_note' by indicating batch operation, though it doesn't explicitly name the alternative.

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 intent to delete multiple notes is implied by the tool name and description, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of 'delete_note' or other siblings. The phrase 'stable per-item outcomes' gives a hint about partial failures, but no clear context or exclusions are provided.

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