Delete Multiple Project Items

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, it discloses that every item is validated before any deletion (atomic pre-check), that deletion goes through a temporary bin, that it cannot be undone here, and that timeline-used items are refused unless confirmed. That is exactly the operational context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Four dense sentences with no filler: scope, atomicity, routing/fallback, and the refusal rule are each front-loaded in order of decision relevance. Nothing repeats the title or annotations.

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 destructive batch tool with a pre-validation pass, an irreversible-in-place fallback path, and an existing output schema, the description covers everything the agent needs to call it safely and correctly.

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 coverage is 100% so both parameters are documented in the schema. The description still adds value by stating the confirm flag's real effect (overrides the timeline-usage refusal) rather than just restating the default:false note.

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 (delete) with the exact resource types (bins, sequences, clips, files) and its scope (multiple, not single). It also distinguishes itself from sibling delete_project_item and delete_bin by naming the items it covers.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: organize_project_items_uxp with action 'remove' is the preferred documented route, this CEP call is the fallback. It also states the condition under which items are refused and what flag overrides that refusal.

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