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

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: it is a soft delete that stays in history marked removed, never counts, and can be recorded again. It also discloses side effects for shortlist/contacted outcomes and the idempotent already:true result, directly complementing idempotentHint and clarifying why destructiveHint is false.

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 core purpose and precondition are front-loaded in the first sentence. The remaining clauses are dense but each carries behavioral value; the description is slightly long but not padded.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no output schema, yet the description explains the soft-delete lifecycle, special cases for shortlist/contacted outcomes, and repeat-call behavior. Combined with annotations, an agent has everything needed to 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 coverage is 67%, and the description reinforces outcome_id's source (get_outcomes) and explains the role/username relationship. role_id is still only indirectly characterized as 'in a role,' but the description meaningfully supplements the schema rather than merely repeating it.

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 (Remove), resource (outcome in a role), and identifier source (id from get_outcomes), which clearly distinguishes it from record_outcome and decide. An agent can identify the operation without opening the 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?

Gives an explicit trigger: 'when the user says it was recorded by mistake.' It also clarifies alternative semantics for shortlist removal (same as decide none) and contacted removal, so the agent knows when this tool is and is not the right choice.

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