Docflow Delete Files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It explicitly warns 'Deletion is permanent,' which is critical for a destructive operation, and constrains the scope to 'processed files.' It does not detail side effects on downstream review results, but the core irreversibility is disclosed.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action, then adds the endpoint, selector requirement, and the permanent-deletion warning — every sentence earns its place.

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 three-parameter destructive tool with an output schema, the description covers what is deleted, how to select targets, and that deletion is permanent. Minor gaps remain around what happens if both selectors are supplied or if neither is provided, but the core call is adequately specified.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It names task_ids and batch_numbers and explains that either may be used, which is useful. However, it does not explain workspace_id or the exact semantics of the identifier values beyond what the parameter names already imply.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('processed files from a workspace'), and the endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from unrelated delete siblings such as docflow_delete_workspace or docflow_delete_category.

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?

It gives clear invocation guidance ('Provide either task_ids or batch_numbers') and implies scope via 'processed files', but it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over alternatives like retry_files, update_file, or fetch_files. The usage context is implied rather than stated.

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