delete_sequence

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly communicates a destructive side effect by saying 'Deletes', which is adequate, but it does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether undo is possible, or what happens if the sequence is currently open or active.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the operation, and it is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter delete tool.

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?

The tool is simple and its single parameter is documented, but there is no information about return behavior, error conditions, or preconditions such as whether the sequence must be closed before deletion. It is minimally complete but lacks meaningful operational context.

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 input schema already documents the only parameter fully: 'The ID of the sequence to delete'. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Deletes') and a specific resource ('a sequence from the project'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes this from sibling tools like create_sequence, duplicate_sequence, and close_sequence without needing to open any schema.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_multiple_project_items, remove_selected_clips, or close_sequence. The description simply states the action without explaining context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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