delete_track

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It correctly warns of permanent deletion, which is critical. However, it omits side effects (e.g., effect on clips, devices, automation) and does not mention any prerequisites or error conditions.

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, front-loaded sentences with zero wasted words. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second adds a critical warning.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not mention return value. It also lacks information on error cases (e.g., invalid index) or the behavior when deleting a track that is currently playing or has dependencies. For a simple deletion tool, more context would improve completeness.

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 only parameter is track_index, an integer. Description says 'by index,' which merely repeats the parameter name. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should add meaning (e.g., valid range, how to obtain index), but it does not, providing minimal added value.

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?

Description states 'Permanently delete a track by index,' clearly identifying the action (delete), resource (track), and identifier (index). It distinguishes from siblings like duplicate_track, create_track, and update_track, which are not deletion operations.

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?

Description mentions irreversibility ('cannot be undone via API') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_track or flatten_track. It does not suggest when not to use it or what to consider before deletion.

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