delete_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id

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

Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to repeat those. However, it adds no extra behavioral context—no mention of irreversible consequences, impact on associated recordings or lineups, or any required permissions. With the bar lowered by annotations, the description contributes nothing beyond the obvious action.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded: 'Delete a single DVR' leads with the action and resource, followed by the HTTP path and an argument list. Every sentence serves a purpose, and there is no fluff.

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 delete operation with a single parameter and an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it omits any caveats about destructive consequences (beyond annotations) or when this operation is appropriate relative to sub-resource deletions. Given the existence of related sibling tools, a brief note on scope would improve completeness, but it is not critically incomplete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'The ID of the DVR,' which essentially restates the parameter name and type. It doesn't explain how to obtain a valid dvr_id, any format constraints, or relationship to other DVR-related resources. This is a minimal, nearly tautological explanation.

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 single DVR'), and includes the HTTP endpoint for precision. It differentiates from sibling operations like delete_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_devices_by_device_id by specifying the whole DVR, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many related DVR operations (e.g., deleting devices, lineups, or reloading guide). The description simply states the action without mentioning conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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