crosspad_apps_remove

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which establish this is a mutating operation. The description adds the behavioral nuance that it removes a submodule (a structural git change) and delegates to app_manager.py, adding context about implementation mechanism beyond the annotation's generic destructive flag.

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 short, purposeful sentences. Front-loaded with the primary action and target. Zero waste. Only minor gap: could add a sentence on effects/prereqs without hurting 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?

A destructive 2-param tool with good annotations (destructiveHint=true) and an output schema present. The description adequately conveys scope and mechanism. Given output schema and annotations cover safety profile, the description is reasonably complete for a removal operation, though reversibility/failure behavior are not covered.

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 50% — only 'platform' has a description. The description doesn't explain 'app_name' beyond its schema pattern, but the tool name ('apps_remove') plus schema pattern makes app_name's meaning reasonably clear. Platform semantics (idf=platform-idf, pc=crosspad-pc, arduino=ESP32-S3) come from schema. Description adds minimal value beyond schema here, slightly below heavy compensation needed.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Remove an installed app submodule from a platform repo.' It names the target (installed app submodule), scope (platform repo), and mentions delegation mechanism. Differentiates from siblings like apps_install/apps_update by clearly being the removal counterpart.

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?

States what it does and delegates to app_manager.py, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or exclusions vs sibling tools (e.g., apps_sync, submodule_update). The removal context is implied but no distinction is made from crosspad_apps_update or submodule_update.

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