delete_file

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it is destructive and permanent, differentiates between KB files (unlinked from disk and removed from FTS5 index) and project reference files (only index entry removed), notes non-idempotence (throws on unknown ID), states no auth/rate limits, and specifies the return 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?

Starts with 'DESTRUCTIVE.' as a clear warning, then packs essential behavioral details, error semantics, return value, usage guidance, and alternatives into a tight paragraph. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Despite no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, behavior, edge cases (unknown ID), return value, safety guidance, and related tools. It is complete for a destructive single-file deletion 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?

The schema covers the only parameter 'id' with description 'File ID' (100% coverage). The description doesn't add meaning beyond that, though it contextualizes how the ID affects behavior (KB vs project reference). This meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 and resource: 'Permanently delete one file by ID.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from the bulk variant 'delete_files' and from alternatives like 'remove_tags' and 'set_favorite'.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use only when the file is truly obsolete.' It provides clear alternatives: 'to deprioritise without losing data, untag (remove_tags) or unfavorite (set_favorite) instead.' Also mentions the bulk variant for multiple files.

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