Delete layer template

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

Although annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description adds substantial behavioral context: deletion is soft (goes to Deleted), it clears the template from project defaults, existing clips retain their layers, and the return value includes whether a default was cleared. It also names the restore path and the retention reference.

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 compact and front-loaded: the delete behavior, default-clearing effect, existing-clip behavior, undo path, retention reference, and return shape all appear in a few tight clauses with no filler.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the important effects: what happens to the template, project defaults, existing clips, how to undo, where retention is documented, and what the return value contains. Nothing essential is missing.

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% and the only parameter's schema already explains that it is a layer template id available via list_layer_templates. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Delete a template') and immediately distinguishes this soft delete from permanent removal by saying it goes to Deleted and can be undone. An agent can tell this apart from purge_layer_template without inspecting either schema.

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 recovery guidance ('Undo with restore_layer_template') and points to list_deleted for retention duration. It does not explicitly compare against purge_layer_template, but the soft-delete semantics strongly imply when this tool is appropriate rather than permanent purge.

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