delete_folder

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by disclosing the default behavior that videos survive and return to the main library, and it calls out the required delete scope. It also reinforces the confirm requirement, which is useful safety context not fully captured by annotations alone.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: what the tool does, the default outcome for videos, and the required permission and confirmation flag. No wasted words and the main action is 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?

For a destructive delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, safety default, permission requirement, and confirmation mandate. It does not explain the irreversible nature when delete_videos_too is true, but the parameter schema already documents that, so the description is sufficiently complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds practical context around confirm and the default behavior of delete_videos_too, but it does not substantially expand on parameter semantics beyond what the schema already documents.

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 opens with 'Delete a folder,' which is a specific verb and resource, and clearly differentiates from sibling tools like delete_video and delete_showcase. It also adds meaningful scope by noting videos survive by default, making the tool's purpose more precise.

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 gives clear operational context: it requires the delete scope and explain that confirm must be true. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like update_folder or remove_videos_from_folder, but the tool's purpose is straightforward enough that a capable agent can infer when to use it.

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