Remote-Datei loeschen

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds critical behavioral context: deletion is permanent ('endgueltig'). This goes beyond annotations by emphasizing irreversibility, though it could mention error handling for missing files.

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 extremely concise—only two short sentences—with no filler. Every word serves a purpose: the main action, permanence warning, and usage tip. Front-loaded with essential 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?

For a simple deletion tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action, permanence, and a safety recommendation. It is practically complete, though could mention expected behavior on nonexistent files for full clarity.

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% and already describes 'remotePath' as the path to delete. The description does not add new parameter-level details (e.g., format constraints or examples), so it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (file) with the explicit verb 'loescht' and object 'Datei'. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like 'silicon_rename' and 'silicon_make_dir' by focusing on file deletion, providing clear purpose.

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 advises using 'silicon_list_dir' before deletion ('vorher mit silicon_list_dir pruefen'), indicating a precondition. It implies not to use it without verification, offering clear guidance, though it does not explicitly list exclusions.

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