remove_animation_asset_from_pose_search_database

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond them by disclosing the exact idempotency semantics (out-of-range index returns removed:false + note rather than erroring) and the critical side effect that the search index is NOT rebuilt, plus the follow-up call required.

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?

Three dense sentences, each earning its place: identity/inverse, idempotency behavior, and the required follow-up. Front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler.

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?

With no output schema present, the description compensates by enumerating the exact return shape and by covering the two things an agent must know for correct use: out-of-range handling and the index-rebuild follow-up. Nothing essential is missing for a 2-parameter mutation tool.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates that the index is 0-based and lists the return fields, but adds no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides; 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?

States a specific verb (Remove), the exact resource (one FPoseSearchDatabaseAnimationAsset entry from a UPoseSearchDatabase), and the keying model (0-based index). It also names the sibling it inverts (add_animation_asset_to_pose_search_database), so an agent can distinguish it from the add counterpart without opening a schema.

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?

Gives the operational sequencing rule explicitly: 'run build_pose_search_database_index afterwards', and names the inverse sibling for the add case. It does not spell out when to prefer index-based removal over any other cleanup path, but for a single-entry remover the context is clear.

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