delete_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the destructive action but fails to disclose that the operation creates a commit, requires the current file SHA, or is irreversible. No detail on side effects or error conditions.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It is concise but lacks necessary detail; however, conciseness is appropriate for the overall simplicity of the description.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this one-sentence description is completely inadequate. It omits critical context such as commit requirements, SHA validation, and branch behavior, making it difficult for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, and the description adds no parameter information. It does not explain the role of message, sha, branch, or other fields. Without compensation from the description, the parameter semantics are entirely unclear.

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 'Delete a file from a repository' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_file or create_or_update_file. It unambiguously states the tool's core function.

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?

No usage context or guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or edge cases (e.g., handling branches, required SHA).

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