Delete Animation Track

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('remove') and return value, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether all keyframes are removed, if the action is reversible, or required permissions). The description is adequate but not comprehensive for a destructive operation.

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 consists of two clear, front-loaded sentences. The first sentence states the primary action and the second specifies the return format. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explicitly states the return value. It mentions the target via the 'handle' parameter but relies on the schema for details. The description is sufficient for a simple delete operation, though it could provide more context about the relationship between tracks and keyframes or how to construct the handle for different target types.

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 coverage is 100% (all parameters described in the input schema). The description additionally clarifies that the track is identified by 'param_id' and the optional 'component' for vector tracks, which adds helpful context beyond the schema's descriptions. This extra clarification justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 tool name 'delete_track' and title 'Delete Animation Track' clearly indicate a delete operation on a track. The description specifies 'Remove an entire CTrack', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete_keyframe' which removes individual keyframes.

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 when one wants to remove an entire track identified by param_id and optional component. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., using delete_keyframe for individual keyframes) or mention any prerequisites or restrictions. The context is implied but not directive.

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