delete_clips

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

No annotations provided, so description should disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Delete', but does not explain if deletion is reversible, affects disk or only pool, error handling for non-existent names, or any side effects. Significant gap for a destructive operation.

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?

Description is extremely short and front-loaded, but lacks necessary details. While concise, it sacrifices completeness. Could be improved by adding a second sentence on usage constraints.

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 absence of output schema, annotations, and schema descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not cover return values, error states, or scope restrictions (only root folder clips). Leaves many questions unanswered 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 has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. It only mentions 'by name' but does not explain the 'names' array parameter semantics (e.g., format, behavior with multiple names, case sensitivity, or what happens if a name doesn't exist). Minimal added value.

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?

Description clearly specifies the action (Delete), resource (media pool clips), location (root folder), and selection method (by name). It distinctly differentiates from sibling deletion tools like delete_marker, delete_timeline, etc.

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 deleting clips by name, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or any prerequisites (e.g., project must be open, clips must exist in root folder). No when-not guidance provided.

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