Delete a file in Home Assistant's config directory

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds important behavioral detail beyond them: deletion is irreversible, certain files and paths are refused, and deleting an included file can break Home Assistant's configuration check. This is exactly the kind of consequence detail an agent needs for a destructive tool.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then layered with warnings and constraints, all of which earn their place for a destructive operation. It is slightly verbose and contains an awkward phrase ('Vome component on the home'), but the structure remains readable and purposeful.

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 destructive file-deletion tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, restrictions, irreversible nature, permission scope, and pre-deletion checks. Given the annotation and schema richness, nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 100%, and the schema already explains both 'path' and 'instance_id' clearly, including relative-path formatting and instance mismatch behavior. The description adds some path-scope context by naming refused files and directories, but it does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema baseline.

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 uses a precise verb and resource: 'Delete one file under the config directory.' It immediately scopes the operation to a single file ('never a directory') and distinguishes deletion from directory removal. This is clear enough for an agent to select it over file read/write/edit/list siblings.

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?

It gives concrete when-to-use examples ('a throwaway test file, a superseded package') and clear preconditions: read first if contents matter, ask the owner before deleting someone else's file, and remove !includes references before deletion. It also states required scope and protected path exclusions, leaving little to inference.

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