Delete a video generation

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

Annotations only give destructiveHint=true; the description adds the crucial nuance that credits already spent are NOT refunded and that deletion removes the result, not the charge, plus 'No undo'. This is real behavioral context beyond what the structured fields disclose and directly informs the decision to call it.

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 short, front-loaded sentences: purpose first, then the charge/undo caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and for a destructive delete tool the description covers the essentials: what is destroyed, the financial consequence, and irreversibility. What an agent needs to call this correctly is present.

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 100%, so both jobId and workspaceId are already documented by the schema (including that jobId comes from list_video_jobs). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 a generated video and its clip'), with the scope clarified by 'and its clip'. It is trivially distinguishable from siblings like get_video_job or delete_upload, and an agent can tell what is removed without opening the schema.

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 this is the irreversible removal path ('No undo') but never states when to reach for it versus alternatives or prerequisites (e.g. jobId source is left to the schema). Usage is deducible from the verb but not explicitly guided.

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