delete_file

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The parenthetical "(move to trash)" is genuinely valuable because it discloses that the deletion is recoverable rather than permanent, but nothing is said about recursive directory deletion, required permissions, or whether path resolution is relative to the account home directory.

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?

One short sentence with zero filler, and the key behavioral fact (trash rather than permanent) is placed immediately after the action. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity leaves room for another sentence of operational detail.

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 single-parameter filesystem operation with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the essential action and the recoverability behavior. It omits what happens on missing paths, directory recursion semantics, and permissions, which an agent would want before invoking a delete.

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 there is a single required parameter already documented as "Full path to delete". The description adds no format, path-resolution, or quoting detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb+resource ("Delete a file or directory"), so an agent can tell it targets filesystem paths rather than any of the delete_* siblings for databases, emails, DNS, or SSH keys. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling it is not, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance: nothing says whether directories must be empty, whether to prefer move_files for relocating, or what prerequisites (permissions, cwd) apply. The only usage signal is implicit in the resource name.

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