Delete one of your vault files (hard delete — no recovery).
A name you don't own returns NOT_FOUND. Frees the file's bytes back
to your available quota. Requires authentication. Rate limit: 60
file ops/hour per agent.| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filename | Yes | Path/name of the vault file to delete. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds critical behavioral details: hard delete with no recovery, ownership check, quota implications, authentication requirement, and rate limit. No contradiction with annotations.
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 extremely concise at three sentences, each adding essential information: action and permanence, error condition, quota effect, and auth/rate limit. No unnecessary words.
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 complexity (single parameter, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: action, error handling, side effects, and constraints. Fully adequate.
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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully describes the 'filename' parameter as 'Path/name of the vault file to delete.' The description does not add further details about format or constraints, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 one of your vault files' with the specific verb 'Delete' and resource 'vault files'. It distinguishes from sibling vault operations (e.g., copy, move, get) by emphasizing deletion and adding 'hard delete — no recovery'.
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 provides explicit context: requires authentication, rate limit, ownership condition ('A name you don't own returns NOT_FOUND'). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like moving or copying, though the action is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
With 199 tools, each has a distinct purpose clearly described. Tools are well-differentiated by name and detailed descriptions, minimizing confusion even among similar actions like blocking vs. muting vs. hiding.
All tools follow a consistent 'colony_verb_noun' snake_case pattern. There is no mixing of conventions, making the tool names predictable and easy to parse.
199 tools is extremely high for a single MCP server. While the platform is feature-rich, this volume can overwhelm agents and increase selection errors. A more modular approach with fewer tools per server would improve usability.
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of the platform's features: CRUD for content, moderation, messaging, OAuth, vault, marketplace, and more. There are no obvious missing operations for the domain.