delete_preview_files

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows it deletes data. The description adds 'Uses QE DOM' which is cryptic and adds minimal behavioral insight. No further details on reversibility or side effects.

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 very concise at two sentences. The first sentence clearly states purpose; the second adds a technical note that may not be universally helpful. Overall efficient, but the second sentence could be omitted or integrated.

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 does not mention what the tool returns or how to interpret success/failure. It also omits prerequisites (e.g., open project) and potential consequences beyond deletion. The single parameter is not referenced in the description.

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 input schema covers the single parameter (media_type) with full description and default. The tool description adds no additional semantic information about this parameter, so it relies entirely on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate for 100% coverage.

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 action (delete) and target (preview/render cache files), distinguishing it from similar siblings like delete_sequence or delete_track. However, it is terse and does not elaborate on scope or implications.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it state any prerequisites or contraindications. It simply states what it does without context.

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