Safely delete file

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that deletion is conditional on an exact current SHA-256 match, which is a meaningful safety behavior beyond the raw schema. It does not detail mismatch errors or irreversibility, but 'Delete' plus the hash gate gives solid transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the action, scope, and key precondition efficiently.

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 has three required parameters, no annotations, and zero schema field descriptions. The description fails to explain `project` and `path` and does not cover what happens when the SHA-256 check fails, leaving important invocation details incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the `project`, `path`, or `expectedSha256` parameter names. It only gestures at the SHA-256 concept, leaving `project` and `path` semantics almost entirely undocumented.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('one existing file'), and a distinguishing condition ('only when the caller supplies its exact current SHA-256'). This clearly separates it from file modification and creation tools in the sibling list.

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 phrase 'only when the caller supplies its exact current SHA-256' gives explicit usage context and a precondition for safe invocation. It does not name alternative tools or exclusion cases, but the safety condition clearly implies when this tool should and should not be used.

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