delete_file

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

The description confirms the destructive nature but adds no new behavioral details beyond what annotations already provide. Annotations include destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which cover the safety profile. The description does not elaborate on irreversibility, side effects, or idempotency behavior.

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 short and economical, but it contains a grammatical error ('a existing' instead of 'an existing'). It earns its place without padding, though polish is needed.

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 low complexity (one required parameter) and the rich annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description is adequate for a simple delete operation. It omits edge-case behavior or return details, but the annotations and schema cover the essential aspects sufficiently.

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 description's verb 'Delete' clarifies that file_id identifies the file to delete, which is valuable because the schema's parameter description says 'File ID to show'—a mismatch. The tool description implicitly corrects this and adds meaning beyond the schema.

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) and the resource (file), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools like delete_item or delete_absence by explicitly naming 'file' as the target.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios to avoid. The description simply states the action without contextual usage instructions.

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