firestore_delete

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the destructive scope of recursive:true for both documents and collections, which is the most important behavioral trait here, but it never states that deletion is irreversible, what happens when the path does not exist, or what the call returns.

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 front-loaded sentence with a clear verb, and the nested parentheticals are dense but each carries information about the recursive flag. Nothing is padding, though the doubled parenthetical structure reads awkwardly.

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 3-parameter tool with a fully documented schema, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the key decision point (recursive scope). The main missing piece is any note on irreversibility or error behavior, which matters for a delete tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some meaning beyond the schema by explaining recursive in the context of both a document path and a collection path, but it says nothing extra about the database parameter or path formatting rules.

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 verb (delete) and two resource types (document, collection) and explains how the recursive flag changes the target set in each case. An agent can distinguish this from firestore_set or firestore_get without inspecting the schema, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the recursive semantics hint at when each mode applies, but there is no explicit guidance on when to delete a collection path instead of individual documents, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as firestore_set with null data.

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