live_delete_track

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses destructive nature and recovery option, but does not describe side effects, permissions, or the meaning of the confirm parameter. Behavioral transparency is minimal beyond the obvious mutation.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action. Each sentence serves a purpose: stating the core action and providing recovery guidance. No unnecessary text.

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 2 parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits explanation of the confirm parameter, index semantics, and does not contextualize the tool among siblings for selection. The output schema exists but the description still lacks key 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, requiring description to compensate. Only 'index' is mentioned in description, but no details on valid values (e.g., 0-based?) or the confirm parameter. The description adds little beyond parameter names.

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?

Description clearly states 'Delete a track by index' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like live_delete_clip and live_undo by specifying track deletion and recovery via undo.

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 mentions using live_undo for recovery, implying irreversibility, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like muting or other delete tools. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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