delete_indexed_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses the destructive nature of the operation and details what is removed (transcripts, comments, both). The return values are documented. Missing: error handling (e.g., video not found) and authorization needs.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence, but the Args/Returns section adds verbosity. Every part is useful, but could be slightly trimmed for efficiency. Still effective.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, deletion action) and presence of output schema in description, it covers purpose, parameters, and return values. Lacks error scenarios and prerequisites, but is mostly complete for an agent.

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 0%, so description must fully explain parameters. It does: video_id is the YouTube video ID, content_type is optional (transcript or comment), and explains behavior when None. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 it deletes a video's indexed content, specifying the resource (semantic search index) and the verb (delete). It details what gets removed (transcripts, comments, or both), distinguishing it from siblings like get_indexed_videos or semantic_search tools.

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?

Explicitly mentions the tool is useful for re-indexing or cleaning up the index, providing clear context. However, it does not specify when not to use it or list alternative tools for related tasks, which would improve guidance further.

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