media_pool_delete_clips

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

The annotation destructiveHint already signals destructiveness. The description adds the important scoping constraint ('current Media Pool folder' and 'by name'), which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose other behavioral traits such as irreversibility or effects on timeline references, though the annotation covers the key safety aspect.

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 is front-loaded with the action. Every word adds value and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The tool has one parameter, a destructive annotation, and an output schema. The description covers the essential purpose and scope, while the annotation covers the destructive nature and the output schema defines return values. This is sufficient for a simple deletion operation.

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 schema already documents clip_names as 'Names of clips to delete' (100% coverage). The description adds meaningful context by specifying these names are relative to the current Media Pool folder, which is not in the schema and helps the agent understand the execution scope.

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), target resource (clips), and scope (current Media Pool folder, by name). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like media_pool_delete_folders and clip_delete_marker, so the agent can easily understand what this tool does.

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 context (delete clips from the current folder) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives. It doesn't mention exclusions or alternative tools, so the agent has to infer from the name and sibling list.

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