fs_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the VM lock state and the need to explicitly unlock afterwards, which is not encoded in the annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and follows with the critical lock context. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 destructive tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and the lock constraint. However, it does not address failure scenarios (e.g., non-existent path, permission errors) or the behavior of recursive=false on directories, which could be inferred from the schema but not explicitly stated. Given the tool's simplicity, this is a minor 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries full responsibility for parameter meaning. While 'path' and 'recursive' are self-explanatory from names, the description does not clarify that recursive is required for deleting non-empty directories or any path constraints. It merely mentions 'file or directory' without explaining how the parameters map.

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 'Delete a guest file or directory.' with a specific verb and resource, and the distinction from siblings like fs_move and fs_mkdir is evident. The additional note about VM lock pertains to context, not 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 provides clear usage context by stating the VM remains locked and instructing to call vm_unlock when finished. This implies the tool is used as part of a locked-VM workflow and gives a prerequisite/after-action, though it does not explicitly compare to alternatives.

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