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

The description fully discloses side effects: soft delete moves to trash (restorable), hard delete permanently removes and reclaims storage. This goes beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true) and gives the agent a precise mental model of the outcome.

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 concise (two sentences), uses clear formatting for the hard:true flag, and avoids redundancy. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's behavior.

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 simple delete operation with one required and one optional parameter, the description covers all necessary context: default behavior, hard-delete condition, and side effects on storage. No output schema is needed, and the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it 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?

The 'hard' parameter is well-described in both schema and tool description. The 'file_id' parameter lacks a schema description, but the tool's purpose makes it obvious that it identifies the file to delete. The overall parameter semantics are clear, with a minor gap for file_id.

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 deletes a file, with a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a file'). It also distinguishes the soft vs hard delete behavior, making its purpose unambiguous among sibling tools like octopus_move or octopus_read.

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?

It explains the default soft delete and the hard delete condition, providing clear guidance on when to use hard:true. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, the deletion semantics are sufficiently contextualized.

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