remove_canned_service_fee

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Remove' but does not disclose side effects such as whether removal is permanent, whether it requires specific permissions, or what happens if the fee item does not exist. This is a destructive operation with no transparency beyond the verb.

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, focused sentence with no redundant words or information. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simple purpose.

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 straightforward removal operation with two fully documented parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits any mention of prerequisites (e.g., whether the canned service must exist) or error behavior, and it does not reference the family of canned-service fee tools. Given the tool's simplicity, a 3 reflects the lack of additional useful context.

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?

The input schema fully describes both parameters (itemId and cannedServiceId) with clear descriptions, and schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and a clear resource ('fee line item from a canned service template'). It unambiguously distinguishes from sibling tools like update_canned_service_fee or remove_canned_service_labor, which operate on different entities.

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, such as update_canned_service_fee for modifying a fee or add_canned_service_fee for adding one. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage context.

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