fs_delete

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

The description discloses important behavioral context beyond the annotations: the VM remains locked by this session and vm_unlock must be called afterward. This is a critical side effect not captured by destructiveHint or readOnlyHint, and it does not contradict the annotations.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the essential lock/unlock warning immediately follows. Every sentence carries necessary information.

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, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the target, the operation, and the significant VM-lock side effect. It omits explicit semantics for recursive deletion of non-empty directories, but this is partially inferable from the recursive parameter defaults and is a relatively minor gap.

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 only 33%, with path and recursive lacking descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail; it loosely maps 'file or directory' to path and 'VM' to vm_name but says nothing about the recursive parameter or its behavior, which the schema also fails to explain.

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 a specific verb ('Delete') and a clear resource ('a guest file or directory'), which immediately distinguishes it from sibling fs tools like fs_move, fs_list, and fs_stat. Scoping the operation to the guest also prevents confusion with host filesystem operations.

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?

There is no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any mention of conditions that should or should not trigger it. The only actionable note is a post-condition about unlocking the VM, which is not usage-selection guidance.

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