engine_static_remove

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Delete') but does not mention whether the operation is permanent, whether it requires specific permissions, what happens if the path does not exist, or what the return value is. For a destructive operation with zero annotation support, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no filler words. The verb and object are front-loaded, making it immediately scannable and easy to parse.

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 single-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the basic action and parameter meaning. However, it omits any caveats about reversibility, error behavior, or prerequisites, which an agent might need to call it correctly, especially given the absence of annotations.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the 'path' parameter has no description in the schema. The description explicitly says 'by its path', which clarifies that the parameter is the file path, adding meaning that the schema lacks. It does not specify format or constraints, but the core meaning is conveyed.

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 states a specific verb (Delete), a clear resource (a static file), and the mechanism (by its path). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings that add, rename, load, or otherwise manipulate static files, so an agent can identify the intended operation without opening the schema.

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 such as engine_files_remove or engine_image_remove. The description only states what it does, not the context in which it should be selected, leaving the agent to infer from naming conventions alone.

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