delete_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly conveys the destructive nature (delete), scoping (sandbox), and a key limitation (files only). However, it does not disclose behavior on edge cases (e.g., file not found, directory passed, permissions) or whether deletion is permanent. These are meaningful gaps for a destructive operation.

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?

Two short sentences with bullet points. The first sentence front-loads the core action, and the bullets add constraints without redundancy. Every word earns its place; no filler.

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 (one parameter, no annotations), the description covers purpose, constraints, and parameter semantics adequately. It omits error handling and exact behavior on failures, but these may be covered by the output schema. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward delete operation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It fully explains the only parameter, relative_path, by stating it must be relative to the sandbox root. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema and eliminates ambiguity about path interpretation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('file inside the sandbox'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like make_directory (create) and move_file. It also specifies the scope (files only, not directories), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clear contextual constraints: 'Only deletes files (not directories)' explicitly excludes directories, and 'Path must be relative to the sandbox root' sets a precondition. This gives the agent enough guidance on when and how to use the tool, though it does not explicitly reference alternatives or 'when not to use' beyond directories.

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