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

Annotations already mark the tool as non-read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context beyond that: the password is used once and never stored, and the result is an unrestricted copy rather than an in-place modification.

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 compact sentences with the main action and condition front-loaded. The security note is expressed in a single short clause, and there is no filler or redundant restating of the schema.

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 simple unlock operation, the description, fully documented schema, and annotations cover the essential usage. It doesn't detail error behavior or return format, but the 'unrestricted copy' phrasing and absence of an output schema keep this acceptable.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents file, password, and output_filename thoroughly. The description doesn't add parameter-level detail, but it doesn't need to; 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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('a PDF'), and adds the crucial condition 'you know the password for' plus the outcome 'unrestricted copy.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling PDF tools like repair_pdf or compress_pdf.

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 implies when to use it: when you have the password and want an unrestricted PDF copy. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the condition is concrete enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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