delete_object

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already signals destructive behavior. The description adds that confirmation is required, which is not in the annotation or schema. This gives extra behavioral context about a necessary precondition, though it doesn't explain the exact failure behavior if confirm is false.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource. No redundant information; every word earns its place. Excellent concision.

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 delete operation, the description covers the core action and confirmation requirement. The existing output schema and destructiveHint annotation reduce the need for further details. However, it could be slightly more complete by stating that the object is permanently removed, but the annotation already implies destructive intent.

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 must compensate. It does clarify that 'name' is the identifier and that 'confirm' is required, but it doesn't explain the default of confirm or the effect of not setting it. This partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 action ('Delete an object') and the scope ('by name'), distinguishing it from sibling delete tools like delete_material and delete_collection. It also mentions the required confirmation, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention batch_delete or other deletion tools, nor does it state any conditions or exclusions. The only usage hint is 'Confirm required,' which is more of a behavioral requirement than a usage guideline.

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