TD Delete (live)

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the action is permanent and removes the operator and its children ('This permanently removes the operator and any of its children.'). It also mentions live control context.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the action and context without any wasted words.

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 destructive tool with one parameter, the description covers purpose, behavior (permanent + recursive), and safe usage. Missing details about return value or error handling, but overall sufficient.

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 100%, but the description adds value by explaining the path parameter with an example ('e.g. '/td_mcp/sandbox/noise1'') and recommending staying within the sandbox, which is beyond the schema's description.

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 (delete/destroy), the resource (operator in a running TouchDesigner instance), and the context (live control via td_mcp bridge, wrapping op.destroy()). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on destruction.

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?

Provides clear guidance on safe usage: 'Target a path inside '/td_mcp/sandbox' to stay within the safe work area.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives among siblings.

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