delete_media

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior by specifying that it 'Removes storage files, vector embeddings, and all associated metadata' and warns 'This action cannot be undone,' which covers key aspects like destructiveness and irreversibility. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error handling.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, consisting of two concise sentences that convey critical information without waste. The first sentence states the action and scope, and the second emphasizes the irreversible nature, making every sentence earn its place effectively.

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 tool's complexity as a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the action, scope, and irreversibility, but could benefit from mentioning potential side effects or response formats. However, it adequately addresses the core behavioral aspects for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'media_id' fully documented in the schema as 'UUID of the media asset to delete'. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating with extra details.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Permanently delete') and resource ('a registered media asset'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_media' or 'update_media'. It explicitly indicates the scope of deletion, making the action distinct and 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?

The description implies usage by stating the tool deletes media assets, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_media' or 'protect_media'. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the context somewhat open-ended.

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