Delete a folder from your media library. Items in the folder are moved to the parent folder by default. Cannot delete the root folder ("/").
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| folderPath | Yes | Folder path to delete (e.g., "/Marketing/Old Campaigns") | |
| moveItemsToParent | No | Move items to parent folder before deleting (default: true) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already flag this as destructive and non-read-only, but the description adds valuable behavioral detail: items are moved to the parent folder by default. This goes beyond what annotations provide and helps the agent understand the side effects. No contradictions 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a key constraint. Every sentence earns its place with no filler. Under 50 words, it is highly efficient.
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 with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects: what happens to items (moved by default) and a critical restriction (no root deletion). Combined with the annotations declaring destructive intent and idempotency, the tool is fully specified for an agent to invoke correctly.
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 both parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description only restates the default behavior of 'moveItemsToParent' ('by default'), adding no new semantic information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 tool's function: 'Delete a folder from your media library.' This is a specific verb+resource that distinctly separates it from sibling tools like create_folder, rename_folder, and list_folders. The added constraint about the root folder further clarifies scope.
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 clear context for when to use the tool—when deleting a folder. It also includes an important exclusion ('Cannot delete the root folder'), though it does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it beyond the root restriction. This is sufficient for a straightforward delete operation.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct action and resource: analysis jobs (submit, check, get results, download), folder management (create, delete, list, rename), media operations (list, move, search, set visibility), and account info (organization, profile). There is no overlap or ambiguity between tools.
All tools follow the consistent pattern `echosaw_<verb>_<noun>`, using clear verbs like analyze, check, create, delete, get, list, move, rename, search, and set. The naming style is uniform and predictable across the entire set.
With 14 tools, the server covers a well-scoped platform for media analysis and library management. Each tool serves a clear purpose without feeling bloated or sparse, fitting comfortably within the ideal range.
The server covers the full analysis workflow, folder organization, media searching, and account retrieval. Minor gaps exist such as lack of media deletion or job cancellation, but core workflows are well supported and no critical dead ends are apparent.
