tdarr_delete_unhealthy_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'delete' but does not clarify if the operation is permanent, reversible, or requires confirmation. It lacks details on side effects or return values.

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 conveys the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

While the description covers the basic purpose and parameter, it does not explain the permanence of deletion, whether it affects all matching files or requires confirmation, or how to use it safely alongside sibling tools. For a destructive operation with no output schema, more completeness is needed.

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 has 100% coverage with a parameter description for 'table'. The description adds context by explaining that table3 corresponds to 'failed to transcode' and table6 to 'unhealthy files', which enhances semantic understanding beyond the schema.

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 tool deletes files from specific tables (table3 for failed transcodes, table6 for unhealthy files). The verb 'delete' and resource 'files' are explicit, and it distinguishes from siblings like tdarr_delete_file (single file) or tdarr_bulk_delete_files.

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 cleaning up failed or unhealthy files but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like tdarr_delete_file or tdarr_bulk_delete_files. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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