deleteObject

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the destructive action ('Remove') but doesn't disclose whether deletion is permanent, reversible via 'undo', requires specific permissions, affects scene state, or has side effects. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and includes essential parameter context, making it immediately understandable without unnecessary elaboration.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial details like deletion permanence, error handling, dependencies on other tools, or return values, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty about tool behavior.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the 'id' parameter and its purpose ('by id'), but doesn't explain ID format, how to obtain valid IDs (e.g., from 'getObject' or 'listScenes'), or what happens with invalid IDs. This adds basic context but insufficiently compensates for the coverage gap.

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 ('Remove') and target ('a 3D object from the scene'), and specifies the required identifier ('by id'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'deleteLight' and 'deleteParticles' by specifying object type, but doesn't differentiate from 'clearScene' which removes all objects.

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 versus alternatives like 'clearScene' (remove all objects) or 'undo' (reverse deletion). It mentions the 'id' parameter but doesn't explain how to obtain valid IDs or prerequisites for deletion.

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