delete_video

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing critical behavioral traits: the irreversible nature of deletion and the 50 quota unit cost. It doesn't mention permissions, rate limits, or error conditions, but covers the most important safety and cost aspects.

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 perfectly concise with three sentences that each earn their place: states the action, discloses cost and irreversibility, and explains the parameter. The Args section is appropriately structured and doesn't waste words.

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 destructive operation with no annotations, the description provides good coverage of the critical aspects: purpose, cost, irreversibility, and parameter meaning. The existence of an output schema means return values don't need explanation. It could mention permissions or error cases but covers the essentials well.

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 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining the single parameter's purpose: 'The video ID to delete'. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema. Since there's only one parameter, this is sufficient for understanding.

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 verb 'Delete' and resource 'a video', making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_comment' or 'delete_playlist', though the resource specificity provides some implicit distinction.

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 implies usage context through 'This is irreversible' and cost information, suggesting caution. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_video' or provide prerequisites beyond the video_id parameter.

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