Delete an app file

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'Permanently', reinforcing irreversibility beyond the hint, but says nothing about required actor identity, the concurrency role of expected_version, or what happens to the app if the path is wrong.

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?

A single tight sentence with the key word 'Permanently' front-loaded and zero filler. It is appropriately sized, though borderline under-specified rather than merely concise.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but for a destructive, idempotency-keyed mutation with 6 parameters and 17% schema coverage, the description omits the concurrency and identity semantics an agent needs to call 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?

Schema coverage is only 17% (just command_id), and the description adds no meaning for app, path, actor, request_state or expected_version. With 6 params and 5 undocumented in both places, the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (delete), resource (a file), scope (one file, app-stored), and adds 'Permanently'. An agent can distinguish it from delete_app and data_delete_item by the file/app scoping, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the adjacent siblings an agent might confuse it with (file_write/file_read for the same files, delete_app for the whole app). Usage must be inferred from the name alone.

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