Delete Folder

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

The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: it discloses that the operation is 'Experimental', that it deletes nested folders and link nodes, and that it does not affect the underlying documents, tags, or collections. This meaningfully expands on the destructiveHint annotation without contradicting it.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by clarifying consequences. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 presence of an output schema and rich annotations, the description is sufficient. It covers the destructive scope, non-effects, and experimental status, making it complete for an AI agent to understand the tool's behavior and select it appropriately.

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 already provides full descriptions for both parameters (folderId and workspaceId) with 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional parameter-level semantics, so the baseline score of 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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('delete an AFFiNE organize folder') and clearly states the scope (every nested folder or link node). It also distinguishes itself from related tools by clarifying what it does NOT delete (target documents, tags, collections), which prevents confusion with delete_doc or delete_organize_link.

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 context for when this tool is appropriate (when you want to delete a folder subtree) and notes the destructive impact on sidebar organization. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., delete_organize_link for removing a single link) or state when NOT to use it, so it misses the 'explicit when-not' criterion.

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