delete_item

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

The description explicitly discloses that deletion is soft by default ('moves to .trash by default'), which is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema. It does not restate the irreversibility of permanent deletion, but the schema's 'permanent' parameter description already conveys that. No annotation contradiction exists.

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 sentence front-loads the action, target, and safety behavior with no filler. Every part of the description earns its place.

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 simple two-parameter delete tool, the description covers the affected resource and the default trash behavior, while the schema covers parameter semantics. It does not mention return or error behavior, but no output schema exists and the core deletion semantics are clear enough for correct invocation.

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 input schema already describes both parameters thoroughly, so the description does not need to repeat them. The phrase 'moves to .trash by default' reinforces the permanent parameter's default behavior but does not add new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 names the exact verb ('delete') and resource ('note or folder'), and immediately states the key default behavior: moving to .trash. No sibling tool is a delete operation, so an agent can distinguish this tool without needing extra disambiguation.

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 description clearly establishes what the tool operates on and what its safe default is, so invocation context is clear. It does not list alternatives, but none of the sibling tools compete for this action, so an explicit when-not-to-use clause is not necessary.

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