image_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses high risk, destructive nature, dry_run behavior, audit tagging, and that prior name is captured in audit trail. This provides comprehensive behavioral context beyond safety.

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 fairly concise and well-structured with a header and bullet points for arguments. Some details like audit tagging could be slightly trimmed, but overall efficient and front-loaded with the main action.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers behavior, parameters, and audit context. It might lack error conditions or permission requirements, but is otherwise complete for tool 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains ext_id source, dry_run side effect, and target usage with defaults, adding significant value over the bare schema. Each parameter is clearly described.

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 starts with '[WRITE][risk=high] Delete an image.' clearly stating the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'image'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like image_list, category_create, etc., which have different purposes.

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 advises using dry_run=True to preview deletion and mentions audit requirements. However, it does not explicitly explain when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide contraindications.

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