delete_node

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

The description discloses one important behavioral trait: the scene root cannot be deleted. With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden, but it does not mention that deletion is permanent or irreversible, which is significant for a destructive operation.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the verb and includes a parenthetical constraint. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the core action and a key constraint. However, with no output schema, the agent is left guessing about return values and error behavior (e.g., what happens if the node does not exist), so completeness is only adequate.

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 has 0% description coverage and the description does not explain the node_path parameter format or provide examples. The name 'node_path' implies a path string, but the lack of any parameter-level semantics means the description compensates poorly.

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 clearly states the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'a node from the edited scene', distinguishing it from siblings like delete_scene. The parenthetical constraint about the scene root further clarifies the tool's scope.

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?

Usage is implied by the action: use this tool to delete nodes from the current scene. However, it does not explicitly compare against alternatives (e.g., delete_scene) or state when not to use it, so guidance is minimal.

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