entity_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new information not present in the annotations: the deletion is undoable, and it targets an 'existing' entity (implying failure on a missing id).

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the action and states the one notable property (undoable). Nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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, non-idempotent tool with three undocumented parameters, no required-parameter signal, and no output schema, the description is too thin. An agent still cannot tell whether to pass entity_id, a path, or model_id, or what happens on a missing or invalid entity.

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 0% across three parameters (path, model_id, entity_id), and the description offers no parameter guidance at all. It never explains the relationship between entity_id and the path array, nor which of the zero-required parameters must actually be supplied, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('an existing entity'), so an agent immediately knows the operation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from related siblings such as entity_update, entity_duplicate, or scene_clear, which limits the score to 4.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus entity_update or entity_duplicate, nor any prerequisite (permissions, existence checks, model context). The only hint is that the operation is reversible, which is behavioral rather than selection guidance.

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