Delete media upload

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, and the description adds valuable scope beyond that: it deletes only the short-lived R2 staging upload and leaves later scheduler copies intact. This precise what-gets-destroyed disclosure is exactly the kind of behavioral context agents need for a destructive tool.

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?

Two tight sentences front-load the key context ('Internal/app staging helper') and state purpose plus a critical exclusion with no wasted words. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what is deleted, where it comes from, and what is explicitly not deleted. An agent has enough information to decide whether to call it and what the uploadId refers to.

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 0% description coverage and only names uploadId as a string. The description's mention of deleting a media upload implies uploadId identifies that staging upload, but it does not explicitly explain where the ID comes from or any constraints. The single self-explanatory parameter softens the 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a short-lived MCP staging media upload from R2.' It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like upload_video by stating it does not delete scheduler durable copies. This makes the tool's purpose and scope unambiguous.

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 clear context as an 'Internal/app staging helper' and explicitly states a when-not: it does not delete scheduler durable copies created later by upload_video. It does not name an alternative deletion tool for durable copies, so it stops short of fully explicit alternative routing.

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