削除

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it reveals that deletion is undoable ('Undo 可'), explains deferred execution ('フレーム境界で実処理され'), and lists synchronous return values (deletedEntityId, deletedCount, sceneGeneration). Annotations only indicate destructiveHint=true, making this description highly transparent.

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 relatively concise for the information conveyed: one sentence with clarifications. It is front-loaded with the primary action. However, the structure could be tighter; the parenthetical and bracketed return info add length but are justified by their informativeness.

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 presence of an output schema (implied by return values listed), the description still provides essential execution and timing details. It covers deletion behavior, undoability, parameter alternatives, and return structure. For a destructive tool with complex behavior, this is highly complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the 'name' parameter's utility ('id の代わりに使える。Stop 後など id が変わる場面で安定。') and reinforces the mutual exclusivity of entity and name. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 conveys the action: 'エンティティを子ごと削除する' (delete entity with children). It specifies the verb 'delete' and the resource 'entity', and distinguishes from sibling tools like dx12_remove_component or dx12_duplicate_entity by highlighting the cascading deletion of children.

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 implies usage for deleting an entity and its children, and offers two identification methods (id or name). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives among siblings (e.g., using remove_component for partial removal). Lacks clear situational guidance.

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