delete_script

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly warns '⚠️ Irreversible,' which is a critical safety trait beyond the basic 'delete' verb. However, it does not mention permissions, path behavior, or what happens if the file does not exist.

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: one short sentence plus a warning symbol. Every word earns its place, and the most critical information (irreversibility) is highlighted immediately.

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 delete operation with only two parameters (both documented in the schema) and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and key risk. It could mention path semantics or failure behavior, but the core information is present and the tool is relatively low complexity.

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 provides full descriptions for both parameters (path and filename), with 100% schema description coverage. The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific semantics, so it does not exceed the baseline for a fully documented schema.

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 'Delete a script file' — a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_crons or delete_envs. The scope is explicit (a single script file), so there is no ambiguity about what operation is being performed.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternatives. The resource type is obvious, so usage is implied, but there is no mention of constraints like requiring the script to be not running or needing a specific path.

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