supabase_delete_files

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

With zero annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the obvious destructive nature of 'Delete'. It omits critical behavioral details: whether deletion is permanent, if the operation is atomic (all-or-nothing), what happens when files don't exist, or any rate limiting considerations.

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 appropriately brief at one sentence, though the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is metadata noise that doesn't aid the agent. The core message is front-loaded and efficient.

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 operation with 3 undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks return value documentation, error scenarios, and parameter specifics necessary for safe 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 has 0% description coverage. While the description implies 'bucket' and 'files' (paths), it completely fails to explain the 'site' parameter (presumably the Supabase project identifier) or the expected format for paths (strings vs objects, relative vs absolute paths).

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 resource ('one or more files from a bucket'), distinguishing it from bucket-management siblings like supabase_delete_bucket. However, it fails to differentiate from supabase_empty_bucket (which deletes ALL files), leaving ambiguity about when to use bulk deletion versus emptying.

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?

No guidance provided on prerequisites (e.g., bucket must exist, required permissions), nor when to prefer this over supabase_empty_bucket for bulk operations. No mention of error handling for non-existent files.

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