Remove a scene's keywords

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by disclosing cascade behavior (a keyword unused by any scene disappears from the catalog's scene keyword list), the response shape (what was removed vs. what did not match), and an authorization prerequisite (API key with the Editor role). These are exactly the operational facts the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Four compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and the tag_scene relationship before secondary details. Every sentence carries a distinct fact (scope, cascade, return value, auth), though it is slightly denser than strictly necessary.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly covers return values, plus cascade side effects and the auth role required. For a 2-parameter destruction tool whose safety hint is only destructiveHint=true, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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% and both parameters are documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds matching semantics (only the named keywords, other scenes untouched) and hints at partial-match handling in the return, but no format or syntax detail for the parameters themselves.

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+resource ('Remove keywords from a single scene thumbnail') and immediately scopes it as 'the counterpart to tag_scene'. The scope is also distinguished from untag_video by noting 'other scenes and the video's own tags are untouched', so an agent can separate it from siblings without opening a 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?

Clear context: it operates on one scene's keywords and is the counterpart to tag_scene, and it distinguishes itself from video-level tagging. It stops short of an explicit 'use X when Y' routing sentence, but the boundary conditions are stated with enough precision to select the right tool.

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