files_remote_remove

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

Without any annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only states the action. It offers no details on authentication, idempotency, error handling, or side effects, leaving the agent with insufficient behavioral understanding.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. While concise, it lacks essential usage guidance and behavioral context, making it only average in value.

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 no annotations and an output schema not shown (but indicated), the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, effects, or prerequisites, leaving gaps for a complete understanding of the tool's behavior.

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 both parameters, explaining their types and examples. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline as schema coverage is high.

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 'Remove a remote file.' is clear, with a specific verb and resource. It distinctly separates this tool from its siblings like files_remote_add, files_remote_info, etc., as the only one focused on removal.

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 like files_delete or other remote file tools. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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