mmar_delete_scene_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosure. It usefully states that deletion includes 'all its contents,' revealing the cascading destructive scope. However, it does not mention permissions, irreversibility, or what happens to related data outside the scene instance, so it is only partially transparent.

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 filler. Every phrase adds value: the action, the resource, the scope, and the lookup key.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter deletion tool whose input is fully documented by the schema. The description adds the critical destructive scope ('all its contents'). It lacks usage guidance and explicit return-behavior information, but neither is essential for a straightforward delete operation.

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 schema fully documents the only parameter 'uuid' with type, format, and a description ('The UUID of the SceneInstance to delete'). The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond restating 'by UUID,' so the schema does the heavy lifting and a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the action ('Delete'), the resource ('specific model instance (diagram)'), the scope ('and all its contents'), and the input mechanism ('by UUID'). This distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like mmar_delete_class_instance or mmar_delete_relationclass_instance.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions or exclusions. It only states the mechanism (by UUID), leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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