sigma_delete_file

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the requirement for confirm=True, which is crucial for safety, and clarifies the resource identification method. It does not conflict with the annotations.

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 conveys the action, target, and safety condition. No wasted words.

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 delete tool with only two parameters, the description covers the essential invocation details and the confirmation requirement. The presence of an output schema means return values don't need elaboration. However, it does not mention any side effects or related resources, though annotations hint at destructiveness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining both parameters: inode_id is the identifier for the resource and confirm must be set to true. This provides clear meaning beyond the bare schema labels.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and identifies the resource class ('file/workbook/data model') plus the identifier method ('inode ID'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling delete tools like sigma_delete_workspace or sigma_delete_team.

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?

It states a hard prerequisite ('Requires confirm=True') but gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The resource scope is implied by the description, but there is no direct comparative guidance.

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