remove_file

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

The annotation 'destructiveHint: true' already signals this tool is destructive. The description adds no extra behavioral context, such as whether deletion is permanent, what happens to associated data, or if authentication is needed. With the annotation, the bar is lower, but the description still fails to provide useful behavioral details beyond the annotation.

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 a single short phrase in Chinese. It is concise but not structured as a complete sentence. While appropriate for a simple tool, it could be more informative with a brief sentence structure.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 required parameter, no output schema, destructive annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It explains the action but lacks completeness: it does not describe return values, error states, or whether the operation is reversible. This is acceptable for a straightforward delete operation, but more context would improve usability.

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% and the parameter 'path' has a description '工作空间路径'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning, such as path format, allowed characters, or whether the path must be absolute or relative. The baseline is 3 given high coverage, but no extra value is provided.

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 '删除工作空间文件' clearly indicates the tool deletes a workspace file. The name 'remove_file' is specific. While the sibling set includes 'remove_doc' for documents, this tool is distinct in targeting files. However, the description does not explicitly differentiate from similar operations like 'remove_doc' or 'remove_database_rows', which limits clarity in a large sibling context.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when to use 'remove_file' versus 'remove_doc' for documents, or any exclusions or prerequisites. There is no context on required file states or permissions.

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