delete_object

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions a return confirmation dict, but omits details like irreversibility, prerequisites (object existence), or undo support. It does not contradict annotations since none are present.

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 short and front-loaded, covering the core action in one sentence. The argument block is somewhat redundant but does not bloat. It remains efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It specifies the object and return type, but lacks detail on side effects or error handling. For a complex scene with many delete siblings, more context would help.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description should add meaning. However, it merely restates the parameter name without adding constraints, format, or examples. It essentially duplicates the schema, offering no extra value.

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 tool deletes an object by name, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_collection, delete_light, etc., which target different scene elements.

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 implies usage (when you want to delete an object), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternatives (e.g., for deleting collections or materials). The context is clear but lacks exclusion criteria.

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