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

Adds real behavior beyond annotations: deleting media from a scheduled post demotes it to draft, and the prerequisite workflow with get_post/update_post. Annotations already cover destructiveness and idempotency, so this supplementary workflow context is valuable though it doesn't mention auth or irreversibility.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and error triggers, then the id source, then the side effect and recovery. No filler.

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?

Covers purpose, error triggers, id discovery, and the crucial scheduled-post-demotion consequence for a destructive mutation tool. No output schema exists, and behavioral gaps are minimal given the annotations; a slightly fuller note on irreversibility would complete it.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds actionable meaning by telling the agent where to source the mediaId (get_post's 'media' array, showing per-file status), which goes beyond the schema's own note.

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) and resource (one media file from a post group), and distinguishes itself from siblings like delete_post, prune_media_reference, and complete_media by scoping to a single media file within a post group.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it (duplicate or never-uploaded slots blocking scheduling with MEDIA_COUNT_EXCEEDED or media-not-ready errors), how to find the required id (via get_post's 'media' array), and the downstream consequence plus follow-up (re-schedule with update_post after demotion to draft).

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