storage_delete

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true; description reinforces irreversibility with 'Real action — irreversible' and provides additional context about BLE transport and the underlying function name.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, effectively using a warning emoji and concise phrasing to convey the core action and parameters.

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 has two parameters, destructive behavior, and an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and behavioral warning completely. It references the output schema implicitly through the function name.

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 0% description coverage; description compensates by explaining both parameters: path (implied as file/dir) and recursive ('for a non-empty dir'), adding meaning 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 the verb 'DELETE', the resource 'file/dir', and the context 'over BLE'. It distinguishes from sibling storage tools by specifying the action and mentioning the parameter for recursive deletion.

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 mentions using recursive=True for non-empty directories but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or compare with alternative sibling tools like storage_rename or storage_write.

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