scene-node-delete

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: it is destructive (removes nodes and children), cannot affect the root node, and auto-saves by default unless instructed otherwise. This adds value beyond the schema, informing the agent of side effects.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that convey all critical information: alias, functionality, use case, restriction, and saving behavior. Every sentence adds value.

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 has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It covers purpose, usage guidelines, and behavioral nuances. A minor gap is the lack of mention about return values or confirmation, but it is still sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning to individual parameters 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?

The description clearly states the action (removes a node and its children), the resource (from a scene), and its use case (clean up unused nodes). It differentiates itself from sibling tools like scene-node-add and scene-node-properties by focusing on deletion.

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 guidance on when to use ('clean up unused nodes') and an important restriction ('Cannot delete root node'). It also mentions the auto-save behavior controlled by a parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives, but given the sibling list, no other tool serves the same purpose.

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