workspace_delete_file

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden for a destructive operation, yet it says nothing about irreversibility, overwrite behavior, required permissions, or what the 'token' parameter implies. The word 'Delete' conveys the mutation, but nothing beyond that basic inference is provided.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, which satisfies the structural bar. However, the brevity is under-specification rather than effective conciseness for a destructive tool with three undocumented parameters.

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 file operation with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description should disclose irreversibility, auth requirements, and path semantics. None of that is present, so an agent knows the action but not how to invoke it safely.

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% and the description does not mention any of the three parameters. The meaning of 'path' (relative vs absolute, workspace-scoped?), 'agent', and the optional 'token' (auth? identity?) is entirely undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('shared workspace file'), which lets an agent distinguish it from the put/get/list siblings on the same resource. It does not explicitly name or contrast with those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to delete versus when to use workspace_put_file, workspace_file_history, or any alternative, and no stated prerequisites. The agent must infer all usage context from the tool name alone.

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