o2_delete

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

Annotations already declare this as destructive and idempotent, but the description adds that the action sends the item to the O2 trash, clarifying it is a recoverable removal rather than permanent deletion. This is valuable context beyond the structured annotations, though it still omits details like permissions or response behavior.

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 definition is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It delivers the essential action and outcome immediately.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with annotations already covering safety, the description states the core effect but leaves the parameter format and choice against cloud_delete unaddressed. It is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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% for the single required 'path' parameter, so the description must compensate. It only implies the path points to a file or folder ('archivo/carpeta') but provides no format, example, or qualification for the 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 specific action ('Envía a la papelera') and resource ('archivo/carpeta'), making the tool's effect clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like cloud_delete, so it falls 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 guidance on when to use this tool rather than alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description only implies deletion, leaving usage entirely to inference.

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