Delete media file

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

The description merely repeats 'Destructive,' which is already captured by the destructiveHint annotation. It adds no new context such as irreversibility, impact on links or references to the media file, or any side effects. The openWorldHint and idempotentHint are not elaborated.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action, but the second sentence 'Destructive.' is redundant with the annotations and adds no value. It is concise but not efficiently informative.

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 operation with no output schema, an agent needs to know consequences (e.g., permanent deletion, impact on URLs) and any required context. The description provides none of that, leaving the agent to rely solely on annotations for safety awareness.

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 only 50% (fileId lacks a description). The description does not mention either parameter or clarify what fileId refers to, so it fails to compensate for the missing schema detail.

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 a specific action (delete) and resource (file from Media Library), which distinguishes it from other delete tools like delete_contact or delete_invoice. It could be more explicit about the scope (e.g., permanent deletion), but it is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it, prerequisites (e.g., needing the fileId), or contrast with similar media operations like upload_media_by_url or list_media.

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