Remove Luma event host

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

The annotations already flag destructive behavior, and the description adds valuable context: the non-mutating preview mode, exact email resolution, and the nuanced handling of visible vs. hidden hosts including the unverified marker. This meaningfully enriches the agent's understanding beyond 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and mode distinction. Every clause adds useful information: preview behavior, exact email resolution, and host visibility handling. No wasted words.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers the important operational details: preview vs. confirmation, host visibility, and unverified markers. It does not describe response shape or error conditions, but the core decision-making context is present.

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 only 33%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify the 'confirmed' parameter and preview behavior, but it adds little detail about event_id or email beyond what the schema field names already imply. Partial compensation only.

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 and resource: 'Preview or remove one host from an event.' It clearly separates the two modes (preview vs. actual removal) and distinguishes this tool from siblings like add_host and update_host by focusing on removal.

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?

The description provides clear context on when to use the tool: when you need to remove a host, with a safe preview beforehand. It explains the confirmation step but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full guidance.

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