remove_silence_candidates

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

The description mentions 'remove or mark' but does not elaborate on side effects, destructive nature, or permissions required. It does not disclose that deletion in 'delete' mode might be irreversible, or that markers are added with specific behavior. Without annotations, the description carries full burden and falls short.

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?

The description is a single sentence of 8 words, which is very concise. It avoids fluff and gets the point across, but could benefit from a bit more structure or detail without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, two operational modes, and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not clarify default behavior (mark mode), return value, or that detection must precede this step. A more complete description would include these details.

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?

The input schema covers 80% of parameters with descriptions; the tool description does not add new information beyond contextualizing the parameters. The parameter 'min_gap_seconds' lacks a schema description and is not clarified in the tool description, so no additional value is added here.

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 'Remove or mark detected silence candidates from timeline' clearly states the action (remove or mark) and the resource (silence candidates on timeline). It differentiates from sibling tools like 'detect_silence_candidates' which only detects, and other tools like 'add_marker' which are more generic.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for acting on previously detected silence candidates, but does not state prerequisites (e.g., running detect_silence_candidates first) or compare with other removal/deletion tools among siblings.

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