delete_files

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: recoverability depends on the share having a recycle bin, and deletion inside /<share>/#recycle is permanent. It omits that folder deletion recurses by default.

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?

Two tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the recovery caveat. Nothing is padding.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover destructiveness. However, with one required array param and a boolean that defaults to recursive deletion, the description leaves meaningful gaps about batching and recursion.

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 carries the full burden, yet it never addresses the two parameters. 'Files or folders' loosely implies paths accepts both types, but the recursive flag (defaulting to true, a high-impact behavior for folder deletion) is entirely unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (files or folders), which is enough for an agent to distinguish it from list_files, move_files, or the delete_download sibling. It does not explicitly name a sibling it is not, but the domain is unambiguous.

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 statement of when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., move_files, or restore_from_recycle_bin for recovery). The recovery note hints at the recycle-bin workflow but never routes the agent to those tools or states preconditions for the caller.

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