Delete a file

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so "cannot be undone" mostly restates structured data. The genuine added context is the downstream effect: a knowledge-base file "disappears from what the workers can read," which the annotations cannot express. It also notes the structuredContent return shape, though an output schema already exists.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what gets destroyed, then the irreversible consequence and the confirmation requirement. Every clause carries information; 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?

For a single-parameter destructive tool, the description covers the action, the irreversibility, the required user confirmation, and the side effect on worker visibility. Since an output schema exists, the brief return-value mention is a bonus rather than a gap.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already documents the 24-hex-char id pattern and points at heliyos_files_list as the source. The description only restates "by id" and "one file," adding no new meaning, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: "Permanently deletes one file by id." That cleanly separates it from heliyos_files_list, heliyos_files_get, and heliyos_files_upload without needing to open any schema.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition — "confirm with the user first" — that tells the agent when this call is appropriate and what gate must pass before invoking it. It does not name alternative tools (e.g., heliyos_knowledge_entries_delete) for the adjacent case of removing knowledge content, which keeps it short of a 5.

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