uselink_delete_folder

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 usefully discloses a non-obvious side effect: documents are moved to project root rather than deleted. However, it does not address what happens to subfolders or whether the deletion is reversible, which leaves some gaps.

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 two concise sentences. It front-loads the primary action and immediately adds a critical caveat, with no superfluous words. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the main behavior and the most important nuance about contained documents. It could be more complete by mentioning subfolders or permanence, but for a delete-folder operation it is largely sufficient.

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 has one parameter (id) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explicitly explain that 'id' refers to the folder being deleted. Although the parameter name and format are self-explanatory, the description adds no value beyond the schema, so it fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 a folder' with a specific resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_document by explicitly noting that documents inside are NOT deleted and are moved back to the project root.

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 implies a clear use case: deleting a folder while preserving its documents. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions, leaving the usage guidance implicit rather than direct.

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