delete_clip

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It states 'Delete a clip' but does not warn that the operation is destructive or irreversible, nor does it describe the resulting state of the clip slot. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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, using one sentence for the action and a simple parameter list. Every word earns its place, and the key action is front-loaded.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain whether the deletion is permanent, what happens to the slot, how errors (e.g., invalid indices) are handled, or what the response looks like on success. This leaves critical context 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?

The input schema only provides integer types and titles, with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds one-line explanations for both track_index and clip_index, clarifying what each index refers to. However, it omits details like zero-based vs one-based indexing or allowed ranges.

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 uses a specific verb 'Delete' and a clear resource 'a clip from a clip slot', immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_device or delete_track. It unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 usage whenever a clip needs to be removed from a clip slot, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. There is no guidance on when to use this instead of stop_clip or clear_clip_automation, making usage context implicit rather than explicit.

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