Cleanuprecording

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose non-obvious side effects: termination of an active share and file removal even for undownloaded recipients. However, it omits irreversibility, required permissions, and any failure behavior for an unambiguously destructive delete.

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, front-loaded with the action and its main side effect; nothing is redundant. The line breaks read slightly awkwardly but no sentence is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the action, the required id, and the key sharing side effect. For an unannotated destructive tool it would ideally also flag irreversibility and permission requirements, but the essentials are present.

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% for the single required parameter, so the description has to compensate. 'Pass the recordingId' tells the agent which identifier is required but adds no format, source, or provenance guidance, which is thin for the only input.

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 a local recording') plus an accompanying side effect ('stop any share still serving it'), which an agent can understand immediately. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the close sibling abortRecording, so it falls short of a 5.

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 never says when to use this versus abortRecording or finishRecording, which are the plausible alternatives for ending a recording session. Usage is only implied by the word 'Delete' and the post-hoc 'cleanup' framing.

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