seafile_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes critical behavioral traits: the operation is irreversible, deleted items may be recoverable from trash for a limited time, and it returns an OperationResult indicating success/failure. This covers safety implications and expected outcomes.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized. It front-loads the core purpose, includes a critical warning, then lists parameters and return value in a clear format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 (destructive operation with 2 parameters), no annotations, and the presence of an output schema (OperationResult), the description is complete. It covers purpose, behavioral risks, parameters, and return value, providing sufficient context for safe and effective use.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (repo_id and path) adequately. The description repeats these parameter names in the Args section but doesn't add meaningful semantic context beyond what the schema provides, such as path format examples or repo_id constraints.

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 specific action ('Delete a file or directory') and resource ('from Seafile'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like seafile_move or seafile_rename that involve different operations on similar resources. The verb 'Delete' is precise and unambiguous.

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 this tool (to delete files/directories) and includes a warning about irreversibility, which helps guide usage. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives like seafile_move for relocation instead of deletion.

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