Delete Playlist

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description goes further by disclosing that deletion is permanent, that contained videos survive, the exact dry-run behavior of the missing 'confirm' argument, and a quota cost of 52 units. That is real operational context beyond the structured hints.

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 lines, each front-loaded with its key fact: what happens, what is untouched, what the dry-run does, what it costs. No filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations carry the safety profile, so the description only needs to add what those cannot: permanence, side-effect scope, dry-run semantics, and quota. All four are present, leaving nothing an agent needs missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above baseline by explaining the runtime effect of the optional 'confirm' parameter (omitting it yields no deletion plus a descriptive error), which is behavior the schema's own field text only implies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Permanently delete one of your playlists') and immediately bounds the blast radius with 'The videos in it are not affected,' which separates it from delete_video and remove_from_playlist without the agent needing to open any schema.

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?

Explicitly describes the two-step workflow: without 'confirm' nothing is deleted and the error is descriptive, so the agent knows it can safely preview before committing. It does not name alternative tools (e.g., update_playlist vs. this) or state prerequisites, so it stops short of a full when/when-not routing statement.

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