notebook_delete

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

No annotations are provided, but the description explicitly declares 'IRREVERSIBLE' and notes the confirm parameter requirement, fully disclosing the destructive nature.

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 short and efficient, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate sections). However, it is clear and to the point.

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 delete tool, the description covers all essential aspects: action, irreversibility, required parameter confirmation. Output schema exists, so return value explanation is not needed.

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%, yet the description adds crucial meaning: notebook_id is a UUID, confirm must be True after user approval. This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('notebook'), clearly indicating permanent deletion. It distinguishes from sibling tools like notebook_rename and notebook_query.

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 states the requirement for confirm=True and user approval. While it does not explicitly compare to alternatives, the action is unambiguous and guidelines are implied.

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