delete_doc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Delete' implies a destructive action, but the description does not state that the deletion is permanent, irreversible, or what exactly happens to the file (e.g., removed from storage). This lack of warning is a significant gap 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?

The description is a single direct sentence with no filler. Every word is essential: it names the action, target, and the two 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?

For a simple delete operation with complete schema coverage and no output schema, the description conveys the core operation. However, it does not provide details about side effects, prerequisites (e.g., whether the file must exist), or the irreversible nature of deletion. Given the lack of annotations, the description is adequate but not fully complete for safe autonomous use.

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?

The input schema already describes both docType and slug with 100% coverage, including the enum values for docType. The description simply repeats the parameter names ('by type and slug') without adding any new semantic meaning, so the baseline score 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 explicitly states the action (delete), the resource (documentation file), and the required identifiers (type and slug). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_doc and write_doc by the delete action.

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 clearly signals when to use the tool: when a documentation file needs to be deleted by type and slug. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous and the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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