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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the delete is soft, media is never destroyed, neighboring scenes are joined when linear, branching or meeting scenes are left unconnected, the response reports which case occurred, one undo step exists, undo_storyboard reverses it, and no credits are spent. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs before invoking a destructive-looking 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 front-loaded with the core action, then adds compact behavioral context in short clauses. Every sentence contributes operational meaning, including the topology behavior, undo path, and credit cost.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations marking the operation as destructive, the description provides strong context about soft deletion, topology handling, undo, and cost. It is nearly complete, though it could do more to distinguish sibling deletion tools and explain the storyboard_id parameter.

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 0%, so the description should compensate. It explains that the scene is identified 'by number,' which adds meaning to the scene parameter, but it does not clarify storyboard_id or provide constraints such as positive numbering beyond what the schema already encodes.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete one scene by number.' It clearly scopes the operation to a single scene, which distinguishes it from delete_storyboard and update_scene without requiring schema inspection.

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?

Usage is implied by 'Delete one scene by number,' and the description names undo_storyboard as the reversal path. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this over alternatives such as update_scene, delete_storyboard, or removing scenes through other storyboard operations.

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