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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the cascading side effect of clearing imageMediaId/videoMediaId, but that sentence largely restates the schema's clearPrimaryMediaId description, and it says nothing about irreversibility, error behavior when no ref matches, or authorization requirements for a destructive 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?

Two tight sentences with the core delete action front-loaded and the side effect second. No filler, though the second sentence duplicates the schema's clearPrimaryMediaId wording rather than earning its place with new 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 six-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the primary action and the main cascade, but omits irreversibility, failure modes, and permission requirements. Adequate but with clear gaps given the tool's complexity.

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%, so all six parameters are already documented, and the enum values for role are enumerated in the schema. The description references mediaId, role, and the clear behavior but adds no format, default, or interaction detail beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Delete shot media refs') plus the matching criteria (mediaId and optional role), which cleanly separates it from add_shot_media_ref and update_shot_media_ref. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so an agent must infer the distinction from the verb, but the action is unambiguous.

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 the matching semantics (delete refs for a given mediaId, optionally narrowed by role), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer update_shot_media_ref, and no stated prerequisites such as required permissions or edit/shot ownership.

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