ruddur_delete_media_asset

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

The description adds the authorization requirement ('Requires scope: media.manage') which is not present in the annotations. It also confirms the destructive nature, consistent with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. No contradictions found, and it provides useful context beyond structured data.

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 short sentences) and immediately states the purpose and a key requirement. No wasted words, and it front-loads the essential action.

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?

While the description is clear for a basic delete operation, it lacks context about effects (e.g., whether deletion removes attachments, if it's reversible, or what happens to associated data). Given the destructive nature and the existence of a sibling 'detach' operation, a brief clarification of the difference would improve completeness. However, annotations and schema partially cover the behavioral 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?

The input schema covers all parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The tool description itself does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but it also doesn't need to because coverage is 100%.

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') and the resource ('creator media asset'), which exactly matches the tool name and distinguishes it from sibling operations like update, list, attach, and detach. It also specifies a required scope, adding precision.

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 the tool should be used when deleting a creator media asset and notes the required scope. It does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., detach_media_asset for removing association rather than deletion), but the clear purpose provides sufficient context for a delete operation.

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