agent-tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and delivers substantial value: it discloses TOCTOU protection, path traversal prevention, and restrictions against deleting system files or directories. Missing minor operational details like return values or error handling prevents a perfect 5.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: sentence 1 establishes core purpose, sentence 2 lists critical safety constraints, and sentence 3 provides the dry_run usage tip. Front-loaded structure puts the essential action first, followed by safety-critical constraints.

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 destructive 2-parameter tool with complete schema coverage, the description adequately covers safety constraints and usage patterns. While it could specify return behavior (since no output schema exists), the safety disclosures and dry_run guidance provide sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by contextualizing the dry_run parameter ('to preview') and reinforcing the file_path constraint ('single file'), helping the agent understand the preview workflow and safety boundaries.

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 opens with 'Deletes a single file' - a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes it from siblings like copy, rename, or backup. The 'single file' specification differentiates it from potential bulk operations, and the safety constraints further clarify scope boundaries.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to 'Use dry_run=true to preview' and implicitly defines when not to use it via safety constraints (no directories/symlinks). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for directory deletion (e.g., suggesting bash or procexec for rmdir operations) when those cases arise.

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