editor_delete_actor

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose important behavior: deletion goes through editor Undo/Redo history, and the boolean controls whether child actors cause rejection or are deleted. It does not cover every edge case, such as invalid actor IDs or undo limits, but it gives substantial behavioral context 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?

The description is two tight sentences with no wasted text. It front-loads the action and then immediately clarifies the only ambiguous parameter behavior.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral details: undo/redo integration and hierarchy handling. It could be slightly more complete with explicit preconditions or failure behavior, but it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 only 50%, and the description compensates by fully explaining the otherwise undocumented deleteDescendants parameter, including both true and false behavior. The actorId parameter is documented in the schema as coming from editor_scene_graph, so the description does not need to repeat it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Deletes a loaded actor.' It also adds the meaningful scope detail that deletion happens through the editor Undo/Redo history. It is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate this delete operation from nearby actor-modification siblings.

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 explains the key conditional behavior of deleteDescendants: true deletes the hierarchy, while false rejects actors with children. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or list preconditions such as an open scene or loaded actor context.

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