remove_rotation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether this is destructive/irreversible, what happens if the named profile does not exist, whether it affects running tunnels, or any permission requirements. For a removal (mutation) tool, this is a significant gap.

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 short sentence that is front-loaded and contains no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it carries almost no information beyond the name.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a destructive removal tool with no annotations and 0% parameter description coverage, the description is too sparse: it doesn't cover side effects, error behavior, or parameter sourcing. It is minimally viable but has clear gaps.

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 0% and there is 1 required parameter ('name'). The description only implies an identifier is needed via the resource name but adds no semantics about the format, source, or constraints of 'name'. This is the baseline 3 for a single-parameter tool where the schema provides the name but no description.

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: 'Rimuove un profilo di rotazione' (Removes a rotation profile). Clearly distinguishable from sibling add_rotation and list_rotations. However, the description is in Italian while all sibling tools and schema titles are in English, creating a language mismatch that slightly reduces clarity for an English-context agent.

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?

Implies usage (use this to remove an existing rotation profile) and the sibling set (add_rotation, list_rotations) makes the alternative obvious, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives.

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