delete_object

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

Annotations already flag destructive=true and readOnly=false; the description adds a non-obvious behavioral nuance—non-empty containers require force=True to delete. This goes beyond the structured annotations and does not contradict them.

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, front-loaded with the action and selection criteria, and no wasted words. The force=True condition is clearly separated.

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?

The essential invocation details are covered (selector alternatives and force behavior), and annotations supply the destructive safety context. It does not describe return values or error handling, but for a delete-only tool with a strong description this is still adequately complete.

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 description is the only source of parameter meaning since the input schema is an empty object. It correctly identifies instance ID and scene path as alternatives and force as a boolean modifier, but it does not provide exact parameter names or types, leaving some ambiguity for invocation.

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'), a clear resource ('GameObject'), and selection criteria ('by instance ID or scene path'). It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like create_object or set_active.

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?

It gives concrete invocation guidance: provide either an instance ID or a scene path, and use force=True for non-empty containers. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list contains no other delete tool, so the usage context is clear.

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