delete_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal a key behavior: a backup is created before deletion by default. However, it does not mention what happens when backup is disabled, whether deletion is permanent, or what occurs if backup creation fails.

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 short sentences with no filler. The verb-object structure front-loads the purpose, and the backup note adds meaningful behavioral context in a compact way. Every word earns its place.

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 simple file deletion tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. An agent can correctly invoke it with the right parameter values and understand the default backup behavior. A minor gap is not explicitly stating the consequences of setting create_backup to false, though the schema implies it.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description only restates the default backup behavior and adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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.' This is unmistakably distinct from sibling tools like read_file, write_file, and list_directory. The backup clause adds useful scoping without obscuring the core purpose.

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 implies the tool is for deleting files, which is a clear trigger for use. However, it does not explicitly discuss when not to use it, safety checks, or alternatives. There is no direct comparison with sibling file tools, though the action itself is unique among them.

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