delete_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_lineups

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-read-only, so the description does not need to restate that. It does identify the destroyed object as a DVR Lineup, which aligns with destructiveHint, but it adds no further side effects, reversibility, or authorization context.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, the endpoint, and a short argument list. The main action is front-loaded and there is 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?

Given the simple two-parameter destructive operation plus annotations and an output schema, the core call is adequately specified. The missing usage guidance and the vague lineup parameter leave enough ambiguity that an agent may not know what value to supply.

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 carry parameter meaning. It usefully explains dvr_id as 'The ID of the DVR', but lineup is only glossed as 'The lineup to delete'—a near-tautology that does not explain its format, how to obtain it, or why it is optional with a null default.

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 states the specific action ('Delete a DVR Lineup') and provides the exact DELETE endpoint, making the verb and resource unambiguous. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, so it falls short of the strongest sibling-differentiating score.

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?

No guidance is given for when to use this tool over siblings such as update_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_lineups or delete_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id. The only usage cue is the action verb itself, with no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative conditions.

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