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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals danger, and the description adds the important irreversibility note: "Cannot be undone." It does not discuss permissions or side effects beyond deletion, but it adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with no waste. The action and the deletion condition are front-loaded, followed by the irreversibility warning.

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. The description covers the deletion condition and irreversibility, and annotations cover destructiveness; only permission/prerequisite details are absent.

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%, and both parameters are documented only as UUID value wrappers. The description implies the company being removed but does not explain entryId or add meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: "Remove a company from a person's attributed portfolio." It also states the exact condition that justifies deletion, making it distinguishable from the sibling add operation.

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?

It clearly says when to use the tool: when attribution turned out to be the firm's rather than the person's. It does not name alternatives or explicit when-not cases, but the triggering context is specific.

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