delete_asset

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses destructive nature, reference-checking behavior, and path interpretation. It does not mention permissions or error handling, but the key behavioral traits are covered.

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 concise sentences with zero fluff. Front-loaded with the main action, then key details and nuance.

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 and presence of output schema, the description covers all critical aspects: action, reference-checking, path rules. Does not mention return values (handled by schema) or error cases, but is adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains force: 'Checks for references first unless force=True' and asset_path: 'Paths without a dot are treated as directories.' This adds clear meaning 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?

Clearly states the tool deletes an asset or directory from the Content Browser, with specifics about reference checking and path interpretation. Distinguishes from siblings like delete_actor or delete_data_table_row by focusing on assets/directories.

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 implies when to use (to delete assets/directories) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools. The reference-checking behavior gives some guidance, but no exclusions or comparisons are provided.

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