cleanuparr_delete_strikes

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already indicates a destructive operation. The description adds context by specifying 'all strikes' are deleted, not a single strike, and that it is scoped to a download-item GUID. This goes beyond the annotation and clarifies the destructive scope.

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, concise sentence that communicates the core functionality without any unnecessary words or repetition. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, clear destructive annotation, and existing output schema), the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what is deleted, the scope, and the parameter's meaning without needing to describe return values or side effects.

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 only defines download_item_id as a string with no description. The tool description clarifies that this is a 'download-item GUID', which adds semantic meaning and helps the agent understand what value to provide, compensating for the lack of schema description.

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 action (Delete), the resource (all strikes), and the scope (for a download-item GUID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cleanuparr_purge_strikes (which likely deletes all strikes globally) and cleanuparr_list_strikes (which lists strikes).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of when deleting strikes is appropriate. The description only states what the tool does, not when to invoke it.

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