object_delete

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description merely repeats that it deletes objects. It does not add useful behavioral context such as irreversibility, undo behavior, dependency handling, or what happens to child objects. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 wasted words. It is structurally clean, though extremely terse for a destructive operation.

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 a destructive tool with an undocumented required parameter and no output explanation needed because an output schema exists, the description is not complete enough. It identifies the action but omits reference format, deletion scope, and safety context an agent needs before invoking it.

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?

The single required parameter `refs` has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never explains what a ref is, whether it accepts names or IDs, or that it supports a single value or an array. The plural 'objects' is the only hint of batch deletion, which is not enough to document the parameter.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Delete objects from the scene.' It is clear this operates on scene objects rather than materials or other resources, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as object_duplicate or material_delete.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no warning about destructive behavior. Usage is only implied by the name and one-sentence description.

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