delete_scene

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete a scene' without mentioning that deletion is destructive, whether it can be undone (despite the undo sibling tool), or what happens to clips or other elements in the scene. This lack of side-effect disclosure is a significant 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 very concise and front-loaded with the main action. The parameter list is clearly structured. No unnecessary words are used. However, the brevity contributes to missing behavioral context, but for conciseness alone it earns a high score.

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?

This is a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema. The description provides only the operation and parameter, but omits essential context such as side effects (e.g., deleting associated clips), reversibility (undo), or any constraints. For a delete tool, this incompleteness can lead an agent to misuse it.

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 one integer parameter 'scene_index' with only a title, and the description adds 'The index of the scene to delete', which is nearly redundant with the title. It does provide a slight clarification that it is the target scene, but it does not add constraints like valid ranges or default values. Given the 0% schema description coverage, the description minimally compensates but not fully.

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 'Delete a scene' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_scene, fire_scene, and duplicate_scene by the action 'delete'. The parameter 'scene_index' further clarifies which scene is affected.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as the scene needing to exist, nor does it offer alternatives like undo or other scene manipulation tools. The description simply states the action without context.

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