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

The description goes well beyond the annotations (which already indicate destructive and idempotent). It discloses that dry-run is the default, real deletion requires confirmation and a retention choice, workspace delete permission is needed, and an idempotency key is required. This fully informs the agent of conditions and side effects.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, default behavior, and prerequisites. Every phrase adds value without wordiness.

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?

The description covers the core behavior and preconditions for this destructive, idempotent tool with 6 parameters. Given that the output schema exists (so return format is already specified), the description provides sufficient context for the agent to understand the tool's workflow, though it does not elaborate on what the dry-run preview returns.

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?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for the lack of parameter details. It does add semantic value by referencing dry-run, confirmation, retention choice, workspace permission, and idempotency key. However, it does not explain the precise conditions for each parameter (e.g., dryRun must be false, confirmDelete must be true, or the meaning of retention enum values), leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Preview or delete a terminal clip batch.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_timeline_items by focusing on clip batches, and the dual preview/delete nature is explicit.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: for previewing or deleting a terminal clip batch. It implies that real deletion requires explicit confirmation and permissions, giving the agent actionable guidance. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the resource type is distinct enough from siblings.

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