file.delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the default trash behavior, the destination folder, and the hash requirement for hard delete. It does not mention if the operation is synchronous or potential side effects, but provides adequate transparency for a delete tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no filler, and front-loads the primary action. Every word adds value.

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?

No output schema or annotations exist. The description covers core behavior but omits details on other parameters, return value, error handling, and prerequisites (e.g., file existence). It is adequate for a simple delete but leaves gaps.

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 description adds meaning for 'trash' (default and destination) and 'expected_content_hash' (required for hard delete), but does not explain 'file', 'vault', or 'dry_run'. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should cover all parameters; it covers only 2 out of 5 partially.

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 a file' and specifies the resource. It distinguishes between soft delete (trash) and hard delete, which is a key behavioral distinction that differentiates this tool from siblings like file.move or file.create.

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 guidance on when to use trash vs hard delete, including the requirement for expected_content_hash with hard delete. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives, though the sibling list shows no other delete tool.

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