delete_file

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

With no annotations, the description clearly discloses the critical destructive behavior: 'WARNING: This permanently removes the file. Use with caution.' This is essential safety information. It does not, however, mention the confirmation requirement or any recovery options, but the warning sufficiently conveys the irreversible nature.

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: two short sentences plus a warning. It is front-loaded with the action and immediately follows with the critical caution. Every word earns its place without redundancy.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with a complete schema, the description conveys the essential purpose and risk. It lacks clarification relative to sibling tools (e.g., 'delete_note') and does not state success/error behavior, but these are not required given the simplicity and schema completeness.

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% with both 'path' and 'confirm' fully described. The description adds no param-specific detail beyond what the schema already provides, so it defaults to the baseline. The warning about permanence indirectly supports the 'confirm' parameter but does not explain its syntax or semantics further.

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 and resource: 'Delete a file from the Obsidian vault.' This clearly identifies the action and target. However, it does not distinguish between deleting a file and the sibling 'delete_note' tool, leaving potential ambiguity about which is appropriate for different content types.

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 provides a warning about permanence but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_note' or how to handle prerequisites (e.g., confirming paths). No specific usage context or exclusions are offered.

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