remove_label_from_card

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the removal action but does not explain that the label itself is not deleted, that the operation may be reversible, permissions needed, or response/return behavior. 'Update the categorization' hints at a non-destructive change but is not explicit.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence is somewhat redundant but adds the categorization framing; it is not wasteful enough to lower further.

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 simple mutation tool, the description plus a fully documented schema covers the basic operation. However, no output schema and no annotations mean the agent still lacks information about return values, error cases, or side effects, leaving a notable gap.

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 the schema already documents cardId, labelId, fields, and detailLevel. The description adds no extra parameter details beyond mapping 'remove a label' to labelId and 'from a card' to cardId, which is not sufficient to raise above baseline.

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 clearly states the action with a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a label from a card.' It also distinguishes from siblings like 'remove_label' by specifying 'from a card' and adds the categorization purpose.

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 second sentence gives a use case ('update the categorization of a card'), so there is some contextual guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, such as pointing to add_label_to_card for adding or remove_label for deleting a label.

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