Delete Section

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is largely covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: playlists and videos are unaffected (scope of destruction) and the operation costs 50 quota units, which matters for a quota-limited API.

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 plus an isolated quota line. The core action and its non-obvious side effect are front-loaded with zero 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?

With a full schema, an output schema, and destructive/idempotent annotations, the description covers what remains: scope of impact and cost. It could add a pointer to list_sections for retrieving the section ID, but nothing essential is 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 description coverage is 100%, covering both 'section' (ID as listed for your channel) and 'my_channel' (channel selector). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Delete a section') and scopes it to the channel's home page, which cleanly separates it from sibling deleters like delete_playlist, delete_video, and delete_comment. An agent can identify the target object without opening the 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative (e.g., update_section for edits, list_sections for obtaining IDs). Usage is only implied by the verb and the reassurance about side effects; adequate but with a clear gap.

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