operations_rmdirs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavior transparency. It states the tool removes empty directories and can leave the root, but it does not disclose what happens if directories are not empty (e.g., skipped or error), whether removal is recursive, or how the _async and _group parameters affect behavior. The description is marginally adequate.

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 sentence with two succinct clauses, no redundant words, and directly conveys the essential information. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema or annotations. The description covers the main action but omits critical contextual details such as error handling, behavior on non-empty directories, the effect of _async and _group, and whether the removal is recursive. Adequate but incomplete for fully understanding the tool's behavior.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the 'remote' path and the 'leaveRoot' boolean, which are tied to the tool's core action. However, it does not explain 'fs', '_async', or '_group' beyond what the schema provides, so the added value is not comprehensive.

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 it removes empty directories, specifies it operates on subdirectories beneath a path, and mentions the optional leaveRoot behavior. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like operations_rmdir (single directory removal) and operations_purge (remove everything).

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that it only removes empty directories and suggests using operations_rmdir for non-empty ones or operations_delete for files. The description leaves the agent to infer usage without clear context.

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