delete_cache_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It clearly discloses that the action is destructive ('Delete'), scoped to leftover cache files, and intended for interrupted-work cleanup. It does not discuss return values or error cases, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 sentences with no filler. The endpoint, operation, and use case are front-loaded, and every clause 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 one-parameter, single-action delete tool, the description is complete. It specifies the operation, the resource, the path semantics via the schema, and the exact scenario for use. No critical information is missing for an agent to invoke it 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 coverage is 100%: the single required parameter 'file' is already described as 'Full path of the cache file to delete'. The description adds usage context but no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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'), a precise resource ('leftover file from the Tdarr transcode cache'), and the intended purpose ('clear partial output from an interrupted worker'). The cache-specific framing clearly differentiates it from sibling deletion tools like delete_file or delete_job_report.

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?

Explicitly identifies the usage scenario: cleaning up leftover/partial cache output from an interrupted worker. It does not enumerate exclusions or name alternative tools, but the context is narrow and clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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