Delete My File

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

Although annotations already mark the tool destructive and non-idempotent, the description adds important behavioral detail beyond them: the action cannot be undone, and the confirm flow is explicitly a two-step preview-then-execute process.

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 compact and front-loaded: it identifies the action, states irreversibility, gives the ID source, then provides the critical confirmation workflow. Every sentence contributes to correct invocation.

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 destructive two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential risks and workflow: personal storage scope, irreversibility, file ID source, and required preview/confirm behavior. Annotations cover the safety profile, and the description fills the remaining operational gaps.

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 100%, and the schema already explains both file_id and confirm. The description repeats the file_id source and slightly clarifies the confirm preview workflow, but adds little meaning beyond the structured 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 states a specific verb and resource: delete a file from personal Canvas storage. This clearly distinguishes it from other deletion tools such as delete_bookmark or delete_my_entry, and from file-listing siblings like list_my_files.

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?

It gives clear usage guidance: obtain file_id from list_my_files, and use a preview-first workflow before confirming deletion. It does not explicitly discuss when not to use the tool or name alternative deletion paths, but the context is otherwise clear.

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