delete_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for a destructive mutation. It does not say whether deletion is permanent/undoable, whether child nodes are deleted with the parent, what happens on an invalid path, or what the response contains. Only the implicit 'delete' semantics signal destructiveness.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource and identifier front-loaded and no wasted words. Its brevity is efficient, though it borders on under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage the description omits critical context: path format, child-node handling, and failure behavior. Given the rich sibling set, it does too little to help an agent call it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single 'path' parameter. 'By path' merely restates the parameter name and adds no format or syntax detail (e.g. whether it is an absolute Houdini node path like /obj/geo1/box1), leaving the gap largely unfilled.

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 and resource ('Delete a node') plus the domain ('Houdini scene'), which clearly separates it from siblings like create_node and modify_node. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, so it is clear but not fully sibling-differentiating.

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 gives no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and does not point to any alternative or related tool. An agent must infer entirely from the name that this is the counterpart to create_node.

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