Delete file or folder

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (destructive, non-idempotent, openWorld), and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the mandatory confirm gate, the folder-recursive requirement with its reason, and explicit refusal of the files root. It also rules out account-wipe and multi-path behavior.

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?

Four short sentences, each earning its place: action, required flag, conditional flag with rationale, and hard refusals. Front-loaded with the core action and zero filler.

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 single-target delete with no output schema, it covers the required flags, the recursive precondition, and the refused edge cases. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning by tying recursive specifically to folder deletion and explaining why Nextcloud requires it (contents removed). It reinforces the confirm gate rather than merely restating the schema.

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+resource ('Delete one file or one folder') and pins down scope ('one', not multi-path). An agent can immediately separate this from siblings like move or write_file.

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?

Gives clear usage conditions (confirm: true, recursive: true for folders) and negative scope (no account wipe, no multi-path delete, refuses files root). It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative sibling for relocation or batch deletion, so it is clear but not fully routing.

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