delete_actor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly explains that children are detached (not destroyed) and that the force flag overrides the safety check. However, it does not mention error handling for nonexistent actors or undo behavior.

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 three sentences: first establishes purpose and parameter, second clarifies children behavior, third explains force flag. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description covers core behavior (children handling, force flag) and mentions a specific error ('has_children'). It could be more complete by describing the return value or behavior when the actor name is invalid, but it is largely sufficient for a straightforward deletion 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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters, and the description adds value by explaining the force flag's purpose ('overrides the children-attached safety check') and clarifying that 'name' can be a label or FName. This enriches the schema's minimal descriptions.

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 specific action ('remove an actor'), the resource ('actor in the editor world'), and the method ('by name (label or FName)'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'delete_asset' by targeting actors specifically.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_asset'. While the context implies use for actor deletion, it provides no direct comparison or exclusions.

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