remove_agent

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burdenched, but it only says 'Remove an agent' and the return. It does not disclose whether removal is permanent, whether it affects running executions, or what happens if the agent does not exist.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, with a clear verb, a short Args section, and a Returns section. It is easy to scan and directly addresses the single parameter.

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 tool with no annotationsament, the description omits important context such as permanence of removal, required permissions, error behavior, and what happens to dependent resources. The simple return line helps, but an agent still lacks enough to call it safely.

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 schema already declares a required 'name' property. The description's 'name: Agent name' adds only a slight clarification that it is an agent identifier, but no format, constraints, or edge-case behavior is explained despite 0% schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Remove an agent'), which makes the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate itself from siblings like execute_agent or update_agent, but the action is self-evident.

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 given about when to use this tool versus its siblings (list_agent, register_agent, update_agent), nor are any prerequisites or conditions for removal mentioned.

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