Spy Delete File

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior, but it only says 'remove a tab'. It does not state whether the file is permanently deleted, whether the action is reversible, what side effects occur, or what happens to unsaved changes. For a delete-like operation, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 a single, compact sentence with no wasted words, and the action is front-loaded. However, it is so terse that it omits essential context, so the brevity is more under-specification than effective conciseness.

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?

Though the tool has only one parameter and an output schema, the description remains incomplete: it does not clarify the behavior, parameter semantics, or usage context. An agent would not have enough information to confidently invoke this tool, especially given the ambiguity between removing a tab and deleting a file.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'file' parameter. It does not: it says 'tab' but never explains that the file parameter identifies a tab, a path, a project ID, or something else. The agent is left without meaning for the only required parameter.

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 clear action ('Remove a tab from the project'), but the wording is ambiguous relative to the tool name and parameter: 'tab' is not the same as 'file', and it is unclear whether this deletes a file or merely closes an editor tab. It does not explicitly distinguish this from other remove/delete sibling tools.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as project_remove_asset or sb3_remove_sprite. There are no conditions, exclusions, or context cues to help an agent decide when this is the appropriate deletion/removal operation.

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