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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses the non-destructive side effect, the return shape, the equivalent HTTP endpoint, cost, and the 404 item_not_found behavior including on a second remove. It omits auth or permission requirements beyond the api_key parameter, keeping it from a 5.

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 compact and front-loaded. Every sentence adds useful information: operation, side-effect guarantee, return, endpoint, cost, and error behavior.

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?

For a folder-membership mutation, the description covers what is removed, what remains, what is returned, cost, and key error behavior. Since an output schema exists, the return detail is somewhat redundant but not harmful. Auth requirements are the main omission.

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 schema already explains item_id and folder_id. The description reinforces the folder/item relationship through the endpoint path, but does not add much beyond that or explain api_key.

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: remove one video from a folder. It also directly distinguishes the effect from deletion by saying the hook or find and its keep stay, which separates it from deletion-style siblings such as delete_folder or keep_hook.

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 usage context is clear: this removes a single item from a folder rather than deleting the underlying hook/find or its keep. It does not explicitly name alternatives like save_to_folder or edit_folder_item, but the intended operation is unambiguous.

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