delete_track

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete a track' implies destructiveness, but it does not mention irreversibility, side effects on contained clips/devices, or any safety-related details. This is minimal and adds little beyond the tool's name.

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 concise and front-loaded with the action. The parameter explanation is minimal but not wasteful. It earns its place by providing basic context, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 one-parameter destructive tool, the description covers the core purpose and parameter. However, it lacks important contextual details such as what happens to the track's contents, whether the action is reversible, and how to determine the track index. Given the simplicity, this is minimally viable but not 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description needs to compensate. It explains that track_index is 'the index of the track to delete', which gives the parameter clear semantic meaning. However, it omits details like zero-based indexing, bounds, or how to obtain the index, leaving room for ambiguity.

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 track' with a verb and resource, making the purpose obvious. It differentiates from sibling delete tools by specifying 'track', but does not explicitly distinguish from related operations like delete_clip or delete_scene beyond the resource name.

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, prerequisites, or consequences. The description gives no context for selecting this tool over similar delete operations or track-management tools.

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