delete_clip

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 states the tool deletes and frees a slot, implying a destructive action, but does not disclose irreversibility, permissions, or side effects. For a mutation tool without annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 core action, followed by usage guidance and parameter explanations. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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 operation with two indices, the description covers the essential purpose, usage, and parameters. The existence of an output schema covers return values, and the description doesn't need to elaborate on them. It could mention destructiveness more explicitly, but that falls under behavioral transparency.

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 description explains each parameter's purpose (track index, clip index, user_prompt for telemetry) despite 0% schema coverage. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type/title fields and compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool deletes a clip in a given slot and frees it for reuse. The verb 'delete' and resource 'clip slot' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like create_clip by the action it performs.

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 explicitly says to use this tool before create_clip when overwriting an occupied slot, and notes that create_clip refuses to write into occupied slots. This gives clear when-to-use guidance and names the alternative.

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