arcane_remove_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Remove an image' implies permanence but does not state that removal is irreversible, whether it fails if the image is in use, or any permission requirements. For a destructive operation, this is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, but the lack of essential context (e.g., permanence, alternatives) prevents a perfect score.

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 operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not address reversibility, failure conditions, or how it differs from 'arcane_prune_images'. Sibling tools and the environment context suggest more detail is needed.

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%: both 'imageId' and 'environmentId' have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond these, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description does not explain the relationship between the parameters or any constraints.

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 'Remove an image from the environment' uses a specific verb (remove) and resource (image) with scope (from the environment), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'arcane_prune_images' (bulk removal) and 'arcane_pull_image' (adding). The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to choose 'arcane_remove_image' over 'arcane_prune_images' or whether there are prerequisites (e.g., container not using the image). The description gives no context for decision-making.

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