fabric_onelake_delete_path

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

The description adds 'Destructive', which aligns with the annotation (destructiveHint: true). However, it provides no additional behavioral context (e.g., irreversibility, confirmation prompts, effects on related data). With the annotation already present, the description adds minimal value.

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 very concise with two short sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, the second emphasizes destructiveness. While it could be expanded with more context, it is front-loaded and efficient.

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 lack of an output schema and the tool's destructive nature, the description should explain what happens after deletion, permissions required, or side effects. It only says 'Destructive', which is insufficient for complete understanding.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented adequately. The description does not add new semantics beyond stating the tool deletes files or directories. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb ('Delete') and the resource ('file or directory in OneLake'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'fabric_onelake_create_directory', 'fabric_onelake_read_file', etc., by focusing on deletion. However, it does not explicitly mention that it works on both files and directories, which is implied by the schema's 'recursive' parameter.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'fabric_delete_item' for items). It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or potential risks beyond the word 'Destructive'.

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