presentation-remove-rendering-parameter

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description's 'removes' is consistent with that. However, it adds no context beyond the annotations: it does not say whether the parameter must currently exist, what happens if the rendering or parameter is not found, or whether the change is layout-scoped (the schema's finalLayout hint is not reflected here).

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 wasted words. Appropriately sized for the action, though it is so terse that it leaves behavioral gaps that conciseness does not excuse.

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?

The rich schema covers parameter semantics and no output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. For a destructive mutation, though, the description omits any mention of side effects, error behavior, or whether the removal is scoped to final vs shared layout despite finalLayout being a meaningful parameter.

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% across all 7 parameters, so the schema already documents id/path/database/language/finalLayout/renderingUniqueId semantics in detail, including the finalLayout default. The description contributes nothing about parameters, 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 (removes) and resource (rendering parameter on an item's rendering), which is enough to distinguish it from the get/set siblings in the presentation family. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, but the action and target are 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 guidance on when to use this versus presentation-set-rendering-parameter or presentation-remove-rendering, and no prerequisites stated. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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