qwen_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 clearly conveys a destructive action and adds the important recursive=true behavior for directories, but it does not mention permanence, error cases, or what happens if recursive is false on a directory.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded and the key recursive behavior is stated directly, making the description easy to parse quickly.

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 description is adequate for a simple deletion tool, especially since an output schema exists. However, because the tool is destructive and has no annotations, it would benefit from stating that deletion is permanent and clarifying the behavior when deleting directories without recursive=true.

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%, so the description must compensate for missing parameter documentation. It adds meaning for recursive and clarifies the project/path relationship with 'inside a project', but path and project formats, constraints, or defaults beyond the schema are not explained.

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 names a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('file or directory inside a project'), clearly differentiating it from sibling read/write/rename/search operations. The note about recursive deletion adds precision about what the tool can target.

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 intended use is implied: use this tool when a file or directory must be removed. It does not explicitly compare this tool to siblings or state when not to use it, though the destructive purpose is distinct enough to avoid obvious confusion.

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