delete_video

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that deletion is irreversible because the source file is removed, every embed breaks, and Vimeo keeps no copy to restore from. It also flags the authorization requirement (delete scope) that many tokens do not have. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context an agent needs before invoking.

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?

Four short, front-loaded sentences, each conveying a distinct fact: the action, the irreversible consequences, the authorization need, and the mandatory flag. There is no filler or repetition of the schema. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the operation's irreversible effects, prerequisite scope, and mandatory confirmation flag, which is sufficient given the destructive annotations and full schema coverage. It also differentiates from the delete/remove siblings. No output schema exists, so the lack of return-value detail is not a gap.

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 already documents both parameters thoroughly, with confirm's default and 'set true to proceed' and video_id's role. The description reinforces confirm usage with 'Requires confirm: true' but adds no new parameter-level meaning. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the description meets the baseline and slightly reinforces the confirm parameter.

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 the specific action 'Permanently delete a video,' naming the resource and the irreversible nature. It further clarifies scope by mentioning removal of the source file, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like remove_video_from_showcase that only affect collection membership. This leaves no doubt about which operation is offered.

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 conveys clear conditions: requires the delete scope, which many tokens lack, and demands confirm: true. This tells an agent when the tool is usable and what prerequisites exist. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the consequence 'breaks every embed' implies this is the full-delete tool rather than a removal-from-collection tool.

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