unregister_passenger_app

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It calls the action 'remove' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether files are deleted, if a running app is stopped, or if the operation is reversible) or any permission requirements.

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 a single, direct sentence that conveys the action and supported runtimes without any extraneous words. It is efficiently front-loaded.

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?

Despite being a simple one-parameter tool, the lack of annotations and output schema means the description must supply behavioral context. It does not explain consequences, success/failure behavior, or relationships to sibling operations, leaving it incomplete.

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% with 'Application name to remove' providing clear meaning. The description adds no extra nuance beyond what the schema already documents, so 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 clearly states a specific verb ('Unregister/remove') and resource ('a Node.js, Python, or Ruby application'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like disable_passenger_app by explicitly framing it as removal/unregistration.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description (use when you want to unregister/remove a Passenger app), but there is no explicit contrast with alternatives like disable_passenger_app, nor any mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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