s3_delete_file

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'ДЕСТРУКТИВНО' and adds the irreversibility detail 'файл удаляется безвозвратно' (deleted irrevocably). This goes beyond the annotation by emphasizing permanence, which is critical for an agent to weigh before calling. However, it doesn't mention the confirm parameter requirement (that's in the schema) or any side effects beyond deletion.

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 sentence, extremely concise, with the destructive warning in bold/caps. It front-loads the core purpose and safety warning, which is effective for a destructive operation. No wasted words, though it could arguably include a hint about confirm.

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 delete operation, the description covers the essential fact (permanent deletion) and relies on schema for parameters. It lacks guidance on expected return value or error states, and does not mention that the file must exist or how to verify after deletion. Given no output schema and low complexity, this is just adequate but not complete.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, including bucket, file, confirm, and account_id. The description itself adds no parameter-specific information, so it relies entirely on the schema. Under the rule, this is a baseline 3 since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action: delete a file from a bucket, using the verb 'удалить' and the resource 'файл из бакета'. It also mentions the method 's3/delete_file' and distinguishes from sibling tools like s3_delete_bucket and s3_delete_account by specifying 'file' rather than bucket/account. This is a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as s3_get_files or s3_delete_bucket. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., listing files first, confirming bucket ownership) or situations where it should/shouldn't be used. This is a significant gap for an agent deciding between several s3_* tools.

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