file_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It merely restates the action without mentioning that deletion is irreversible, may require elevated privileges, or what happens to non-empty directories when 'recursive' is false. This lack of safety-related context is a notable 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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the action. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, with no redundant words or irrelevant details.

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?

Although the tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema, the absence of annotations means the description should provide context about the tool's destructive nature and behavior in edge cases (e.g., deleting a directory without 'recursive'). This information is missing, leaving the description incomplete for safe and effective use.

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%: 'path' is described as 'Path to delete' and 'recursive' as 'Recursively delete directories'. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Delete a file or directory on the router' uses a specific verb (delete) and clearly identifies the resource (file/directory) and location (router). It distinguishes file_delete from sibling file tools like file_read and file_write, and also from uci_delete which targets UCI configs.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., uci_delete) or when not to use it. There is also no mention of prerequisites, such as permissions, or warnings about destructive consequences.

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