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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so richly: positions already recorded are kept, shared store listings cause the removal to propagate to every connected extension, and the operation is per-locale rather than per-term. It also discloses the account prerequisite and the unauthenticated fallback tools.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the consequence, then the sharing semantics, then locale details. Slightly long in the account/signup paragraph, which drifts toward onboarding copy rather than tool semantics, but overall every section is substantive.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the crucial unknowns: what is and isn't destroyed (positions kept, tracking stopped), propagation via shared listings, and auth requirements. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely is missing.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema by explaining that a term is tracked per store language and that en/de are independent keywords with their own positions. The 'As reported by list_keywords' contract for term is reinforced by the prose.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Stop tracking a search term for an extension, across every store it was tracked in.' This clearly distinguishes it from add_keyword and list_keywords, which are named or implied in the siblings list.

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?

Tells the agent when to use it (to stop tracking) and points to list_keywords to discover the locales an extension tracks. Lacks an explicit when-not-to-use or a direct contrast with the alternative (add_keyword), but context is clear.

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