delete_path

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds no behavioral context beyond what is structured. It does not mention irreversibility, recursive deletion of directories, or potential side effects, which would be valuable for a destructive tool.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place, and the description is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 filesystem operation with no output schema and one parameter, the description omits important operational details such as whether directory deletion is recursive, whether files are permanently deleted or moved to trash, and any permission requirements. The annotations cover only the destructive flag, leaving the description incomplete for safe 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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate for the undocumented 'path' parameter. It only clarifies that path refers to a file or directory, which is minimal and does not explain path format, wildcards, or scope. The added meaning is thin.

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') and resource ('file or directory'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like rename_path, open_path, and make_directory without needing to inspect schemas.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or warnings. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name and siblings.

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