delete_request

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It effectively discloses destructive scope (request + videos), financial impact (credits not refunded), and permanence (irreversible), covering critical safety traits for a mutation tool.

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 high-value: action definition, financial warning, and permanence warning. Front-loaded with the operative verb and no redundant text.

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 without output schema, the description adequately covers operational scope and consequences. Minor gap in not describing success/failure return behavior, though this is less critical given the safety warnings provided.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage (requestId fully documented), establishing baseline 3. The description does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States specific verb ('Permanently delete') and resources ('short creation request and all generated videos'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling creation and listing tools like create_short or list_requests.

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?

Provides clear safety context through explicit warnings ('Credits are NOT refunded', 'irreversible') that guide against frivolous use, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools for comparison.

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