Delete media

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by disclosing that the file is removed from storage and detached from any posts, giving an agent a concrete picture of the destructive side effects without contradicting the annotations.

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 short sentences each serve a distinct purpose: state the primary action, describe the side effect, and give the triggering user intent. There is no filler or tangential detail.

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, single-parameter destructive operation with complete schema coverage and annotations, the description covers the essential behavior and consequence. It could mention permanence or permissions, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 covers the only parameter (mediaId) with a clear description, and the tool description merely reinforces 'by ID'. With 100% schema description coverage, the description does not need to add much parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 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 names the exact operation ('Delete a media file by ID') and the resource, and goes beyond the title by specifying the concrete side effect: removal from storage and detachment from posts. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like delete_post and delete_label.

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 final sentence explicitly says to use the tool when the user wants to delete a media file, which is a clear usage context. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to use it, but given the sibling set, the intended use case is unambiguous.

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