delete_zooms

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

With no annotations the description must carry the full load and it does well: it discloses that whole matching regions are deleted including portions outside the requested range, that no-selector calls are rejected, that dryRun writes nothing and creates no backup, and that backups are automatic on change. Auth/permission behavior and revision-conflict handling are left to the schema.

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?

Four dense sentences, each earning its place, with the destructive scope warning front-loaded ahead of the selector details.

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 seven-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers selection, matching semantics, preview, and backup; only permission requirements and conflict behavior are unstated, and the latter is documented on expectedRevision in the schema.

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?

Adds real meaning beyond the 71% schema coverage: mutual exclusivity of zoomIds vs the range, half-open startMs/endMs semantics stated in prose, the overlap-vs-contained distinction, and dryRun's side-effect-free nature.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('remove existing zoom effects') with an explicit scope clarification ('leaving the video intact') that separates it from siblings like update_zoom and list_zooms.

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?

Gives clear selection rules: EITHER zoomIds OR a startMs/endMs range, with dryRun recommended for inspection. It does not name update_zoom or explain when a caller should modify rather than delete, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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