Delete Image

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description adds 'DESTRUCTIVE' as a redundant emphasis. It adds the endpoint path and the 'generated image' scope, but no new behavioral traits beyond the annotations. Given the annotation coverage, it meets the baseline but does not go further.

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 a single sentence plus a warning, front-loaded with the core action. Every word adds value; there is zero redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

The tool is simple (1 param, clear schema, annotations cover destructiveness, no output schema). The description provides the essential purpose and endpoint, and the schema/annotations fill in the rest. It could mention irreversibility, but that is already implied by 'DESTRUCTIVE' and the destructiveHint, so it is sufficiently complete for its complexity.

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 already provides a comprehensive description of the 'file' parameter (relative path and allowed directories), with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter insight, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('generated image file'), and includes the exact endpoint for precision. It differentiates from catalog query tools and even from the sibling 'sdnext_delete_file' by specifying 'generated image file'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sdnext_delete_file'. It does not mention exclusions, required permissions, or typical use cases. The reader must infer that this is for deleting generated images specifically.

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