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

Annotations declare destructive=true, but the description adds the important context: the action is irreversible, associated files are removed, in-progress videos cannot be deleted, and the remake path returns a new_video_id. That is genuine side-effect and outcome disclosure beyond 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?

Front-loads the action and the irreversibility warning, which is the right priority. The nested parenthetical about remake timing is dense and slightly convoluted, but every clause carries operational meaning.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, irreversibility, confirmation, and the one return value it exposes. It stops short of stating batch semantics (partial failures, behavior when some ids are ineligible), which matters at maxItems 50.

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 description fully explains the `planned` enum semantics (remake vs leave_empty, when each applies, and the one-hour threshold), which the schema only labels superficially. It does not however clarify `video_ids` beyond the name (source of ids, max of 50, mixed valid/invalid handling), leaving part of the 50% coverage gap unaddressed.

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 and resource ("Deletes ready or failed videos ... and their files"), and immediately narrows scope by excluding videos still being made. An agent can distinguish this from retry_video, cancel_publication, or delete_character without opening the schema.

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 names the precondition (only ready or failed videos), the confirmation step ("confirm with the user first"), and the branching rule for scheduled videos via the `planned` enum. It also spells out the alternative behaviors and the timing condition (>1 hour away), leaving little to inference.

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