flipper_delete

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

The description discloses the recursive deletion dependency on an environment variable, adding context beyond the annotations. It does not state that deletions are irreversible, but the explicit mention of the destructive flag requirement partially compensates. No contradictions with annotations.

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, no unnecessary words. Purpose is in the first sentence, key condition in the second. Efficient and well-structured.

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 covers the main function and a key behavioral condition, but lacks details on return values or error handling (no output schema). It does not explicitly state that deleting a non-empty directory without recursive will fail. Adequate but has clear gaps.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds value by explaining the recursive parameter's requirement, but the path parameter remains undocumented in both schema and description. Baseline set to 3 due to moderate coverage and partial addition.

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?

Description clearly states the tool deletes files or empty directories, and distinguishes from sibling tools like flipper_upload or flipper_write_file by focusing on deletion. The inclusion of a conditional for recursive deletion adds specificity.

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 indicates when to use (to delete files/directories) and mentions a precondition for recursive deletion. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool, nor does it point to alternative tools among the siblings (e.g., flipper_rename for renaming, flipper_mkdir for creation).

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