document_remove_all_schema_properties

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It fails to mention side effects (e.g., does it fail if schema doesn't exist? Does it succeed silently on empty schema? Is it destructive?). The description is too minimal for safe autonomous invocation.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the core action. It contains no redundant information. However, it could be slightly expanded to improve completeness without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 string parameters, no output schema), and the context from sibling tools, the description adequately covers the basic operation. It could note expectations about schema existence, but for a clear action on a named schema, it is mostly complete.

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% with basic parameter descriptions ('Session name', 'Schema name'). The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Remove all properties') and the resource ('a schema'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like document_remove_schema_property (single property) and document_add_schema_property (addition).

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 tool versus alternatives (e.g., document_remove_schema_property). No mention of prerequisites, such as the schema existing, or scenarios where removing all properties is appropriate.

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