Delete files from a project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses permanence ('Permanently delete', 'No undo') and verification ('Verifies they are gone'), which are key behavioral traits. It does not mention permissions or recursive behavior, but the essential risk factors are covered.

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 extremely concise: three short sentences, each providing essential information. No filler or redundancy; every phrase adds 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 the tool's simplicity and lack of annotations or output schema, the description covers the core destructive aspects and verification. However, it omits details about non-existent paths, whether directories can be deleted, or error/return behavior, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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 has 50% parameter description coverage ('Project-relative paths' for paths, projectId undocumented). The description adds context by indicating 'from a Claude Design project', which clarifies projectId's role, but it does not explain the format or constraints of paths beyond the schema.

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 'Permanently delete files from a Claude Design project' with a specific verb and resource. It unmistakably differentiates from sibling tools like delete_chat or delete_project by focusing on files.

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 implies usage for deleting files but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like write_files or delete_project. The 'No undo' warning provides caution but no direct comparison to other tools.

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