Permanently delete a video

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description goes well beyond them: it discloses that the source file is removed, every embed breaks everywhere, Vimeo keeps no copy to restore from, and a specific scope is required. This is exactly the kind of irreversible-impact and auth context an agent needs before a destructive call.

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, front-loaded with the action and its consequences, then prerequisites. Every sentence carries distinct information with no padding.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers impact, irreversibility, scope requirement, and the confirm gate. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it safely is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by stating 'Requires confirm: true' even though the schema marks confirm as optional (only video_id is required). That corrects a potentially misleading schema signal.

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 a specific verb (delete) and resource (video) with the key qualifier 'permanently'. It is unambiguous against siblings like delete_folder, delete_showcase, and delete_comment because the resource and effect are both named.

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?

Gives two concrete prerequisites: the delete scope (noting many tokens lack it) and confirm: true. There is no sibling that competes for this action, so a when-not-to-use clause is less critical, but the description doesn't explicitly frame when this should be preferred over update_video or similar.

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