kaiten_remove_card_external_link

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds only the word 'native', which is never defined and does not clarify permanence, permissions needed, or whether the external target is affected.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is tight, but its brevity comes at the cost of the semantics noted elsewhere rather than from judicious editing.

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 destructive, non-idempotent mutation with two undocumented parameters, the description is too thin. The output schema relieves it of explaining return values, but nothing covers preconditions, irreversibility, or what 'native' excludes.

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 0%: neither card_id nor link_id is documented in the schema. The description implicitly maps 'card' and 'link' to those parameters but adds no format, sourcing, or constraint details, so an agent still cannot tell how to obtain a valid link_id.

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 (native external link) scoped to a card, which distinguishes it cleanly from kaiten_add_card_external_link, kaiten_update_card_external_link and kaiten_list_card_external_links. The qualifier 'native' is unexplained but the core action is unambiguous.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious precondition: obtaining a valid link_id, most likely via kaiten_list_card_external_links. It also does not say how removal differs from updating a link with kaiten_update_card_external_link.

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