delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly conveys the destructive nature of the action ('Delete') and the scoping via folder, but does not mention irreversibility, error behavior, or side effects. This is adequate for a simple delete but not detailed.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and includes both relevant parameters. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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 the tool's simplicity—2 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects—the description plus full schema coverage provide sufficient information for correct invocation. A note on default folder behavior or consequences would be valuable, but is not essential for a basic delete operation.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents key and folder with descriptions. The description adds 'by key and folder', which aligns with the parameters but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('memory entry'), and specifies the targeting criteria ('by key and folder'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like delete_search_view and delete_theme by indicating it operates on memory entries.

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 implies usage for deleting memory entries by key and folder, which is a clear operational intent. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives such as move or organize_memories, leaving some room for interpretation.

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