pcloud_delete_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the action and the recursive flag, but fails to mention critical aspects such as whether deletion is permanent or reversible, error behavior for non-existent paths, or what happens if recursive=false on a non-empty folder. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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 extremely concise—two sentences, front-loaded with the action and a focused note on the recursive parameter. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary detail or repetition.

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 two-parameter tool, the description is adequate but not complete. It clearly covers purpose and the recursive flag, but lacks behavioral details like permanence, error handling, and exact behavior for non-empty folders without recursive. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, these gaps make it a minimum viable description rather than a fully comprehensive one.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds a slight semantic clarification about recursive behavior, but this largely restates the schema's description. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description provides minimal added value beyond the structured schema.

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 tool's action ('Delete a folder from pCloud') and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pcloud_delete_file. The verb is specific and the intent 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?

The description provides a clear usage note for the recursive parameter ('Use recursive=true to delete non-empty folders'), offering context on when to set it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools (e.g., pcloud_delete_file) or when to choose this over others, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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