flipper_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only discloses the recursive requirement for non-empty directories, but omits details about irreversibility, error handling, permissions, or whether the action is destructive. This is minimal behavioral disclosure for a delete operation.

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 concise sentences with no redundant information, front-loading the primary action and then providing a necessary usage tip.

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 two-parameter delete tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and the key parameter nuance. It lacks details about error cases and return behavior, but the output schema presumably handles return values. Overall, it is sufficient for selection and basic invocation.

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 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning to the recursive parameter by specifying when it's needed ('for non-empty directories'), but does not describe the path parameter beyond its obvious role. This partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and identifies the resource as 'a file or directory on the Flipper', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like flipper_read_file, flipper_write_file, and flipper_rename.

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 a parameter-specific instruction ('Use recursive=true for non-empty directories') but does not explicitly discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. The usage context is implied by the tool's purpose.

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