删除文件

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description adds that both file and metadata are deleted immediately and that the operation is irreversible. This provides context about scope and immediacy.

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?

Two short sentences in Chinese convey the action, target, timing, and irreversibility with zero redundant content. Information is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with good annotations and full schema coverage, the description is adequate. It clarifies what is deleted and the immediate nature, though it doesn't describe error behavior or return values (no output schema).

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 input schema fully documents the 'code' parameter with details on case-insensitivity and examples. The description does not add further parameter details, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action: 'immediately delete the file and metadata with the specified ID code.' It distinguishes from siblings like extend_expiry (which preserves files) and sweep_expired (bulk deletion of expired files), and explicitly mentions it is irreversible.

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 use when you need to delete a file before its natural expiration ('不等到期'), but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like extend_expiry or sweep_expired. Sibling list is provided but not referenced.

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