delete_file

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

The annotations already include destructiveHint: true, so the mutation is disclosed. The description adds valuable context about the side effect on templates: their JSON stays intact but the linked URL returns 404. This goes beyond the annotation and helps the agent anticipate consequences, which is strong behavioral transparency.

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 sentences with zero filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the important side effect regarding templates is stated immediately after. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and clear.

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 simple delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: what gets deleted and the impact on referencing templates. The destructiveHint annotation covers the irreversibility aspect. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call it correctly, so it is nearly 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?

The schema has 100% coverage with a description for fileId ('File id.'). The tool description does not add any further meaning beyond what the schema provides. Since the schema already documents the parameter, baseline 3 is appropriate; the description adds nothing extra for parameter semantics.

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 verb ('Delete') and resource ('a file and all its variants from storage'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools like delete_template or delete_location by specifying the resource type. No confusion about what this tool does.

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 usage (when you want to delete a file) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or conditions. It doesn't mention prerequisites or typical scenarios beyond the basic operation. This is adequate but lacks proactive routing to/from sibling tools.

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