delete_video

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations: it warns 'WARNING: This is permanent and cannot be undone!', clarifies it does not delete local files, and specifies the return value ('confirmation with the deleted video_id and deleted=true'). The annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false) are consistent and the description enriches them.

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 well-structured with a strong opening statement, a warning, bulleted use cases, parameter info, and return info. It is slightly longer than necessary but each section earns its place, and the structure improves scannability.

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 simple delete tool with one parameter, the description covers the core purpose, usage guidelines, a critical warning, parameter explanation, and return value. It could mention idempotency (calling delete twice) or how to source the video_id, but the annotations and return statement cover much of the necessary context.

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 has only one parameter (video_id) with no description, so coverage is 0%. The description simply repeats the parameter name ('The ID of the video to delete') without adding details on how to obtain the ID, its format, or relationship to other tools like list_videos. Thus it adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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: 'Permanently delete a video from OpenAI's cloud storage.' It uses a specific verb (delete) and resource (video), and distinguishes itself from local-file operations by mentioning download_video and clarifying it does not delete local files.

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 gives explicit use cases ('Clean up test videos', 'Remove unwanted content', 'Free up storage quota') and a when-not ('This does NOT delete any local files you may have downloaded with download_video'). It does not explicitly name an alternative tool for local deletion, but provides clear context.

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