delete_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that deletion 'only removes the index entry' and that files left in a document root are 're-ingested by a later sync_start.' This is a significant non-obvious behavior that warns the caller about the temporary effect for files under document roots.

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 two short sentences: the first states the purpose, the second gives parameter constraints and a behavioral caveat. Every clause adds value, with no redundant phrasing 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?

The tool has only two parameters, a clear purpose, and an output schema. The description covers the action, parameter selection, and a crucial side-effect (re-ingestion), which is sufficient for correct tool selection and invocation. No further context is necessary.

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 0% (no descriptions in the input schema), so the description must compensate. It defines 'filePath' as 'absolute path inside a document root' and 'source' as 'the id of a data/url item,' and enforces exclusivity ('Provide exactly one of'). This fully clarifies the two nullable parameters and their intended use.

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 begins with 'Delete an indexed file, data item, or url item from the index,' which uses a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like ingest_* (add), query_documents (search), and read_file (view), leaving no ambiguity about its role.

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 clear parameter-usage guidance: 'Provide exactly one of filePath ... or source,' which is essential for correct invocation. It does not explicitly contrast when to delete versus sync_start or others, but the purpose is self-evident and the instruction implies the tool is for index removal, not file-system operations.

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