blender_delete_snapshot

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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals destructive behavior, and the description adds meaningful specificity: it explicitly states that both the snapshot .blend file and its metadata record are deleted from the configured artifact root. This tells the agent exactly what collateral is affected. It does not mention permissions or irreversibility, but the annotation lowers the burden.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler. The key facts—what is deleted and from where—are front-loaded, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with a destructiveHint annotation and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: the artifact deleted, the metadata record removed, and the storage location. The only notable gap is the absence of a pointer to list_snapshots for obtaining valid IDs, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor omission.

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%, and the tool description never explains snapshot_id beyond the implication of 'one snapshot'. It does not state that the ID must correspond to an existing snapshot or point to blender_list_snapshots for discovering valid IDs. The parameter name and pattern are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 opens with 'Delete one snapshot .blend and metadata record', a specific verb plus a clear resource, and it distinguishes this tool from siblings like blender_delete_object by specifying that both the .blend file and the metadata record are removed. The operation is unambiguous and accurately reflected by the tool 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as blender_create_snapshot, blender_restore_snapshot, or blender_delete_object. It does not mention that list_snapshots can provide a valid snapshot_id or that this tool should not be used for deleting scene objects. Usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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