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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: it discloses the authorization constraint (only the creator can do it), the succession rule (longest-standing member takes over when the creator leaves), and precisely what is preserved (account, diary entries, shared pantry and cookbooks stay). This is exactly the destructive-operation context an agent needs.

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-loads the core action and scope, then adds constraints and consequences in compact clauses. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the remaining critical context – permissions, succession behavior, and what survives the removal. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly 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% and the schema already describes the name parameter identically, so the description doesn't expand parameter meaning much beyond restating that it comes from get_household. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the full burden.

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 (another member of the user's household), and the word 'another' distinguishes it from a self-removal like leave_household. An agent can differentiate it from sibling household tools 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?

Tells the agent how to obtain the required name ('by the name get_household lists') and to confirm with the user before calling. It doesn't explicitly contrast against leave_household or invite_to_household, so routing to alternatives is implied rather than spelled out, but the operational context is clear.

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