delete_image

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

The description explicitly notes that the action is irreversible, which is a critical behavioral trait for a destructive operation, especially with no annotations present. However, it omits other behavioral details such as required permissions, behavior if the image is in use, or response/error outcomes, leaving partial transparency.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the purpose and the irreversible nature of the action, making it maximally concise and well-structured.

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 simple single-parameter delete operation, the description adequately states the action, the identifier method, and the key consequence (irreversibility). The schema fully documents the parameter, and while no output schema exists, the absence of return details is acceptable for a straightforward delete tool.

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% with the parameter described as 'Image hash to delete', and the description's 'by hash' simply reiterates this without adding new meaning. Since the schema already documents the parameter clearly, the description adds no extra semantic value, warranting the baseline score.

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 uses the specific verb 'delete' with the resource 'ad image' and the identifier method 'by hash', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_video and delete_canvas. The scope is unambiguous and matches the tool name.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for deleting ad images by hash, which implicitly excludes videos, canvases, and other resources. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but for a targeted delete operation this is sufficient.

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