milehost_delete_file

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of exposing behavior. It states that deletion occurs, but does not disclose whether directory deletion is recursive, whether deletion is permanent, what happens for missing paths, or any side effects. For a destructive operation, this is a meaningful gap.

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 only two sentences, front-loads the core action, and adds a clear operational mandate without repetition or filler. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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?

This is a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description lacks critical operational detail such as recursive deletion behavior, failure semantics, or return/confirmation information. An agent could easily mispredict what happens when deleting a non-empty directory or a non-existent path.

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?

The input schema documents all parameters with descriptions, including the relative-path semantics of file_path. The tool description adds no new parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies because schema coverage is essentially complete.

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 ('Deletes') and a specific resource ('file or directory inside the user remote container on MileHost'). The AI AGENT MANDATE reinforces the intended use, and among the sibling tools this is the only deletion-focused operation, so it is clearly distinguishable.

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 explicitly says to use it to 'remove obsolete files or clean up directories on the remote server,' providing clear context for when to invoke it. It does not mention alternative tools or when not to use it, so it misses the full 'when-not/alternatives' bar.

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