ghl_calendar_appointment_note_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, which the description does not contradict. The description adds OAuth scopes, providing some transparency about authorization needs, but doesn't explain the deletion effect (e.g., irreversibility, cascading effects).

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose ('Delete Note'), followed by technical details. It is concise but could be more informative without being verbose.

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 operation with no output schema, the description lacks contextual information about what happens when a note is deleted (e.g., permanent removal, impact on the appointment). Given the low complexity, the minimal description is borderline adequate but incomplete.

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?

Both parameters (appointmentId, noteId) have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already 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 title and description clearly state 'Delete Note', indicating a delete operation on a note resource. The sibling tools include create, list, and update variants, so this tool is easily distinguished as the delete action. However, the description adds no additional context beyond the title and endpoint details.

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, such as when a note should be deleted or prerequisites (e.g., note must exist). The absence of usage direction forces the agent to infer from context alone.

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