unity_asset_delete

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Delete an asset,' but does not reveal whether deletion is permanent, if it moves to trash, if permissions are required, or the return value. This is insufficient 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?

The description is very concise—a single sentence without extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it could benefit from brief structured elements like context about irreversibility or parameter hints.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It omits important context such as what happens after deletion (success/error), whether the asset is permanently removed, and how port routing works. Leaving this discover only via schema is insufficient.

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%, and the schema already describes both parameters ('path' and 'port'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 action ('Delete') and the resource ('asset from the project'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like unity_gameobject_delete or clarify whether it handles folders, so some ambiguity remains.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., unity_gameobject_delete for GameObjects, unity_asset_import for adding assets). There is no mention of prerequisites, caution about irreversibility, or typical use cases.

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