s3_delete_object

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds crucial behavioral nuance: omitting versionId can create a delete marker in versioned buckets, while providing versionId permanently removes that version after a native B2 binding check. It also discloses permission requirements beyond the annotation flags, which is highly valuable for a destructive 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 dense but every sentence earns its place: core action first, then alternative routing, then permissions, then versioning semantics. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or repetition of schema fields.

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-object delete with no output schema, this description is complete: it covers the operation, the aliasing through S3-compatible API, versioning consequences, permission requirements, and the key sibling alternatives. An agent has everything needed to invoke the tool correctly and safely.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema by explaining the behavioral consequences of omitting versus providing versionId, and by tying versionId usage to an additional readFiles permission. This goes beyond simply restating parameter names.

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 ('Delete'), a specific resource ('one B2 object'), and the exact interface ('S3-compatible API'). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tools s3_delete_objects and s3_list_object_versions, so an agent can tell them apart immediately.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use s3_list_object_versions first (targeting a specific version or delete marker) and when to use s3_delete_objects (batches up to 1000). It also states the permission prerequisites for the base operation and for versionId targeting, leaving no ambiguity about invocation context.

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