marker_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses that the tool deletes markers, either by specific frame or all markers of a given colour, and includes the special 'All' case. This is sufficient for a simple destructive operation.

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 a single sentence of 15 words, directly conveying the core purpose without superfluous information. It is well front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple delete tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential functionality. However, it could be more complete by clarifying parameter constraints (e.g., frame number format) and what happens when both color and frame are provided. Overall, it is mostly adequate.

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 schema has zero description coverage (0%), so the description must compensate. It explains that 'color' is a colour name or 'All', and 'frame' is a frame number. However, it doesn't specify what color names are accepted (e.g., predefined list) or the relationship/conflict when both are provided. The description adds meaning but leaves gaps.

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 clearly states the action 'Delete' and the resource 'timeline marker' with two distinct modes: by frame or by colour (with 'All' for all). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'marker_add' or 'clip_marker_delete'.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'clip_marker_delete'. It implies usage for deleting timeline markers, but lacks context on when each mode is appropriate or prerequisites.

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