item_delete_marker

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

The destructiveHint annotation already indicates this is a destructive operation. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond that, such as behavior when the marker does not exist or whether the deletion is reversible. It does not contradict the annotation, but it does not enrich it.

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 that states the essential purpose without any extraneous words. It is front-loaded and easy to process.

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, the description is adequate. It explains what it does and the schema covers all parameters. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be explained. It lacks mention of edge cases (e.g., missing marker), but that is not critical for a basic tool.

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% with all four parameters described. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete the marker at a specific frame offset on a timeline item' clearly states the action (delete), the resource (marker on a timeline item), and the qualifier (specific frame offset). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like clip_delete_marker and timeline_delete_marker by specifying 'timeline item'.

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 for timeline items but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as clip_delete_marker or timeline_delete_marker. There are no exclusions or alternative suggestions, so the guidance is only implicit.

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