delete_diagram_file

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

The description simply says 'delete', which is consistent with the destructiveHint annotation, but adds no extra behavioral context such as irreversibility, error handling for missing files, or side effects. Given the annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description contributes no new information about the tool's behavior.

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, efficient sentence that states the action and object without extraneous details. It is front-loaded with the verb, and every word earns its place. There is no redundancy or 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?

For a simple, one-parameter delete operation, the description is mostly sufficient, and the presence of an output schema means return values need not be explained. However, it lacks usage context (when to use vs. alternatives) and practical constraints (e.g., availability of the file), which an agent would benefit from. Given the sibling tool delete_element exists, the absence of any differentiation weakens completeness.

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 parameter 'filename' is fully described in the schema ('Filename of the diagram to delete'), and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema; it only reiterates that the file is a BPMN diagram, which is already implicit. This meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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' and the resource 'a saved BPMN diagram file', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_element that target elements rather than files. It is specific and unambiguous, though it does not elaborate on what 'saved' means in context.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_element or close. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the file must exist) or situations where deletion is not appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and description.

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