delete_object

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals the key behavioral trait that physical deletion is not performed, which is critical. However, it lacks details on side effects, permissions, or reversibility. The core behavior is disclosed, making it acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence plus a capitalized clarifying sentence. Every word carries weight, and the critical nuance is front-loaded. No waste.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (3 parameters, no output schema), the description is largely sufficient. However, it omits information about return values, side effects, or how the mark affects subsequent operations. While adequate for basic understanding, it lacks completeness for an agent to fully anticipate outcomes.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Since schema description coverage is high, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool sets or removes a deletion mark on an object and explicitly clarifies that physical deletion does not occur. This distinguishes it from any actual delete operation, and the verb 'set/remove' specifies the action on the 'deletion mark' resource.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., actual deletion or other object operations). The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context-specific recommendations.

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