Delete Subfolder

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (which only say destructive/not-read-only) by disclosing that the deletion is a soft delete, that the subfolder becomes inaccessible via the API, that media is relocated rather than deleted, and that confirm=true is required. It also spells out the token/permission model, including delegated and expiring-token cases.

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 functional content is front-loaded into two tight sentences with the alternative named early. The trailing permissions block is long boilerplate (including a docs link and a generic 'may share access, notify people or incur provider charges' clause) that is relevant but bulky relative to the core instruction.

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 destructive 2-required-param mutation with no output schema, the description covers what is destroyed, what happens to the contained media, the confirm requirement, the authorization model, and the multi-delete alternative. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly or route elsewhere.

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 description coverage is 100%, so folder_id, subfolder_id, account and confirm are already documented in the schema. The description restates the confirm=true requirement and auth context but adds no syntax or format detail for the ID parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Deletes one subfolder') and immediately adds the key side effect ('moves its media to the folder's root level'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling bulk_delete_subfolders, so an agent can select it without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative (Bulk Delete Subfolders) and the condition that selects it (multiple subfolders and their media). It also states the precondition for the mutation itself (confirm=true) and the permissions required, leaving little to inference.

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