Delete a playlist

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate those. It adds valuable context beyond annotations: the refusal behavior when linked to scenes, the fact that it names those scenes, and the permission requirement. This is meaningful behavioral disclosure that helps the agent anticipate failure modes. Minor gap: it doesn't state whether deletion is permanent or reversible, but the destructiveHint covers the risk profile.

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 sentences, each earning its place: what it does, when it refuses, and what permission is required. The most important operational constraints are front-loaded. No fluff or repetition of the title.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: the action, the refusal condition, and the permission prerequisite. It doesn't describe the return value, but with no output schema and a simple delete operation, that's a minor gap. The description is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly and anticipate failures.

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 the schema already documents the single parameter (playlistId). The description adds the context that the id is the playlist's id and that deletion is by id, but doesn't add new semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema fully covers parameters.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a resource ('a playlist'), and the identifier used ('by its id'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list-playlists, manage-playlists, and control-playlist by focusing on deletion. The title and description align, and the behavior is unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when deletion is refused (while the playlist is linked to a scene) and names the scenes, which is a clear exclusion condition. It also states a prerequisite (playlist permission must be set to full), giving the agent actionable guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like manage-playlists or control-playlist.

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