delete_directory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It explicitly warns that the operation is irreversible, that confirm must be True, and explains recursive behavior. This adds significant behavioral context beyond the schema, though it does not mention failure modes or side effects beyond the recursive constraint.

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 terse overview followed by a clean Args block. Every sentence adds value; no fluff or repetition of schema fields. The structure is immediately scannable and digestible.

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 is a straightforward destructive operation, and the description covers all necessary context: scope, irreversibility, and parameter semantics. An output schema exists, so return values are not required in the description. Given the complexity, this is fully complete.

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%, so the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It explains path relative to the workspace root, confirm as an explicit requirement with irreversibility, and the default for recursive with conditions. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a directory inside the workspace.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_file and delete_project, and scope is defined relative to the workspace root.

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 implies when to use this tool (when deleting a directory) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. The parameter notes clarify the conditions for deletion (e.g., recursive vs. empty directory), but guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings is not provided.

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