apple_delete_asset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but does disclose the single most important trait: the tool fails rather than cascades when localizations reference the asset. It omits whether deletion is irreversible, required permissions, and what a failure returns, so it is strong but not complete.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler; the scope constraint and the refusal precondition are both front-loaded before any remedy is mentioned.

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 no output schema, the description supplies the critical dependency rule an agent must know before calling. Missing only peripheral details like auth requirements and response shape on failure.

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. 'image or video' maps onto the mediaType enum, and 'from the library' implies assetId, but neither parameter is described by name or format, so meaning is only partially added.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete an ... image or video from the library') and narrows the scope with 'unplaced', which separates it from apple_delete_placement and apple_delete_screenshot. It doesn't name a sibling outright, but the constraint is precise enough to identify the operation.

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?

Explicitly gives the precondition that selects success vs. refusal ('Refuses to delete if any localization still uses it') and names the prerequisite action ('delete the intended placements first'). That's concrete when-to-use guidance; only the exclusion of an alternative deletion tool is left implicit.

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