Gallery (destructive)

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the non-obvious two-phase plan/confirm protocol, which an agent would otherwise miss and which materially affects correct invocation.

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-loaded with the purpose, then action parameters, then the confirm protocol, then the batch alternative. The "(params; * = required)" legend is terse but decodable; nothing is padding.

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 a rich annotation set and an output schema present, the description covers what's left: the single supported action, its parameters, and the plan/confirm workflow. Remaining gaps (scope of "gallery objects", whether album is a name or ID) are modest.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the op object's own schema defers per-action parameter detail to the description or describe_action. Enumerating "delete_stills(album, stills*)" fills exactly that gap and marks the required item.

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?

"Remove gallery objects" names a specific verb and resource, and the action list makes it concrete: delete_stills(album, stills*). It is implicitly distinguished from gallery_read/gallery_write by the delete verb, but the description never explicitly contrasts them, so a 5 isn't earned.

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?

It gives clear operational context: the first call returns a plan + confirm_token and must be repeated to apply, and predictable multi-item sequences should use a single batch_run instead. It does not mention the describe_action sibling that the schema points to, nor any when-not-to-delete exclusions.

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