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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable nuance beyond the annotations: deletion is limited to workspace uploads, and already-rendered films keep their copy. This explains a potentially surprising side effect without contradicting the schema or 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?

Two sentences, no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. The first sentence states exactly what the tool does; the second adds the essential scope and side-effect caveat. Every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the essential facts: what is deleted, the source of the URL, workspace scope, and the rendered-film exception. It does not discuss invalid URLs or non-rendered media references, but the output schema and annotations cover enough for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the sole 'url' parameter is clearly documented as 'The URL upload_media returned (or one from list_media).' The description reinforces this by saying 'delete one photo or video uploaded with upload_media' but adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 resource ('one photo or video uploaded with upload_media'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling delete tools like delete_brand_video or delete_product_screen. It also adds scope: only this workspace's uploads.

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 gives clear context about when this tool applies: deleting media uploaded via upload_media (or listed by list_media). It does not explicitly name alternatives like delete_brand_video, but the scoping statement 'Only this workspace's uploads' and the rendered-film caveat provide meaningful usage boundaries.

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