Delete a media asset

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description emphasizes PERMANENT deletion, no trash/undo, and the requirement of a secret key with media:write scope. This adds critical behavioral context about irreversibility and authentication that annotations alone do not provide.

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 deliver the core action, permanence warning, and consent requirement without redundancy. Every sentence earns its place, front-loading the purpose and critical safety information.

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?

The description covers the destructive nature, user-consent workflow, required key/scope, and fallback behavior without confirmation. Given the simple two-parameter schema and no output schema, this is fully sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and safely.

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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the schema, including the confirm parameter's conditional behavior. The description's mention of 'confirm: true' reinforces the schema but does not add new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides. Schema coverage is 100%, so 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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Delete a media asset') and clarifies exactly what deletion entails: removing the catalog row and stored bytes. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling delete tools for other entities (e.g., delete_article, delete_category).

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?

It explicitly instructs to ask the user before calling and to pass confirm:true only after agreement, and describes what happens if confirm is omitted. This gives unambiguous, actionable usage guidance. There are no competing media-deletion tools among siblings, so no alternative is needed.

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