Delete Mistral File

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond them – it does not state irreversibility, permission requirements, or what happens to associated fine-tuning jobs, which is the kind of context that would earn credit.

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?

A single efficient sentence with no filler, and the verb/resource are front-loaded. It is arguably under-specified rather than bloated, but it does not waste words.

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 one-parameter delete with destructive/idempotent annotations, the essentials are technically present, but with no output schema and no statement of success behavior or consequences, the definition is only minimally complete.

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 single file_id parameter is documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no further meaning about the identifier's format or source.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (file) with scope ('from your account'). It's clear what the tool does, but it offers no differentiation from sibling deletes like mistral_delete_model, mistral_delete_agent, or mistral_delete_library.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., that the file_id must exist or be yours), and no reference to alternatives such as mistral_get_file to verify before deleting. The agent must infer everything.

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