Delete a personal actor

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

Annotations already flag the operation as destructive, but the description adds meaningful behavioral consequences beyond that: existing videos remain intact, new runs can no longer use the actor, and in-progress runs block deletion until completion. This substantially exceeds the annotation baseline.

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?

Three sentences, all providing essential information: the action, the side effect on existing videos, and the blocking condition for ongoing runs. Nothing is wasted, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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 deletion scope, persistent effects, failure condition, and non-deletable catalog actors. An agent has everything needed to invoke it safely and interpret outcomes.

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%, with the only parameter clearly documented as 'Personal actor id from list_actors.' The description itself only restates 'by actor_id' without adding new semantic detail, so the baseline of 3 applies here.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a personal actor of this account by actor_id.' It clearly distinguishes personal actors from catalog actors and clarifies that catalog actors are not deletable, which differentiates this tool from any catalog-related operations.

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 provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: it applies only to personal actors ('Catalog actors belong to Clipwright and are not deletable'), and it states a temporal restriction ('An actor used by a run that has not finished is refused until that run ends'). This gives the agent clear conditions without needing to inspect siblings.

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