remove_helper

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

Annotations mark the tool as idempotent but not destructive. The description adds value by noting that page reload resets the state and that no code changes are needed, which clarifies the transient nature of the operation and its development context.

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 extremely concise: two clear sentences. Every word adds value, and the critical constraints (debug only, reset on reload, no code changes) are front-loaded.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides necessary context about its temporary nature and development use. It does not describe return values, but for a removal action with no output schema, this is acceptable.

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 single parameter 'helperId' is described in the schema as 'Helper ID returned by add_helper', which is clear and sufficient. The description reinforces this by saying 'previously added', ensuring the agent understands the parameter's origin.

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 tool's purpose: 'Remove a previously added debug helper'. The verb 'Remove' combined with the resource 'debug helper' provides a specific action. The sibling add_helper confirms the inverse operation, aiding differentiation.

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 implicitly guides usage by noting 'Debug only — page reload will reset', indicating this is for development and the effect is transient. However, it does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives like dispose_check or remove_helper is obvious given add_helper as sibling.

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