common-remove-item-version

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond them — it does not disclose that removal is irreversible, what happens when the last version is removed, that recursion can affect descendants, or that archive vs recycle bin behavior differs. Purely a restatement of the annotations.

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 zero waste. It is efficient but so thin that it arguably under-specifies rather than optimizes length.

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 an 8-parameter destructive mutation with recursive and wildcard behavior and no output schema, the description omits the consequences an agent needs: irreversibility, recursive impact on children, and archive-vs-recycle-bin retention. Complete parameter data lives in the schema, but the behavioral context is absent.

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%, so all 8 parameters (id/path, archive, recurse, version globbing, database, language, maxRecentVersions) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Removes a version of a Sitecore item'), which clearly distinguishes it from item-level deletion siblings like authoring-delete-item or item-service-delete-item. It does not, however, mention its inverse sibling common-add-item-version or otherwise differentiate itself from them.

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 on when to use this versus alternatives, no preconditions, and no exclusions. The description only restates the operation and gives no routing information for an agent choosing among the many removal/deletion tools.

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