vrchat_gallery_image_delete

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

Annotations already mark destructive=true, but the description adds meaningful context: existing posts, events, or references may be affected, and the tool does not check usage before deleting. This tells the agent that the caller must evaluate preservation consequences.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The primary action is stated first, followed by the two most important caveats: potential reference impact and lack of usage checking.

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 single parameter, complete schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations covering mutability/destructiveness, the description covers all essentials: what is deleted, under what conditions, and what consequences may follow.

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 parameter description already explains that fileId is an exact gallery fileId. The main description reinforces the deletion behavior and ownership constraint, adding context beyond the raw schema.

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 one exact image file owned by the signed-in account and tagged gallery.' The scope is precise and differentiates this from upload/list gallery operations and other delete tools.

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?

Defines the applicable scope: the image must be owned by the signed-in account, tagged gallery, and specified by an exact fileId. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, but the ownership and tag restrictions give clear selection criteria.

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