delete_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so excellently. It discloses recursive behavior in both modes, specifies that permanent delete wipes contents from R2 + DB, and explicitly warns that permanent deletion is irreversible—key behavioral traits for a destructive operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every phrase adds necessary information. It efficiently conveys recursion, the two modes, the system impact (R2 + DB), and irreversibility 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?

For a delete tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior (modes, recursion, destruction, irreversibility). Minor gaps include not mentioning permissions, error handling, or trash retention duration, but these are not critical for basic usage.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It implicitly explains the 'permanent' parameter by linking it to trash vs. permanent deletion, and 'id' is self-explanatory as the folder identifier. It could have mapped parameters more explicitly, but it adds meaningful context.

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 tool's dual function: moving a folder to trash or permanently deleting it. It specifically identifies the resource as a folder and emphasizes recursion, distinguishing it from file deletion tools like delete_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?

The description gives clear context for both modes (trash vs. permanent) and warns about irreversibility, which informs when to use each. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like delete_file or state when not to use this tool, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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