remove_streaming_level

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it distinguishes the loaded vs. unloaded code path and notes that the result is verified by re-querying streaming levels, which tells the agent the operation has verification semantics.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, followed by the conditional implementation detail and a return-value summary. Two sentences plus a return line; each earns its place, though the internal function names are arguably more implementation detail than an agent needs.

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 single-param mutation tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape inline and discloses the verification behavior. It omits error/failure cases (e.g., what happens if the package path is invalid), but overall it is complete enough to call correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter has its own description, so the schema already documents level_package_path. The description stipulates the param must reference an existing sub-level but adds no format/syntax detail beyond the schema. 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 precise verb+resource: removing a streaming sub-level from the current editor world. It explains the two internal mechanisms (RemoveLevelFromWorld vs RemoveStreamingLevel) depending on load state, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool operates on.

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 implies removal of an existing streaming level but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternatives (e.g., set_streaming_level_loaded for unloading, add_streaming_level for adding). Usage is inferable but not stated.

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