edubase_delete_scorm_permission

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond 'Remove', such as error behavior on missing entities, reversibility, or side effects. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description provides minimal added value.

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, front-loaded sentence of 10 words. It is concise but not overly terse; it could include a bit more context (e.g., 'revoke' instead of 'remove') without becoming verbose. It earns its place by stating the action clearly.

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?

The description is too minimal for a destructive tool with 3 required parameters. It does not explain the return value (output schema exists but is not referenced), nor does it mention that the permission must be from the enumerated list (though schema covers that). Given the richness of sibling tools, the description lacks completeness to fully guide an agent.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning or usage hints beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and clearly identifies the resource ('user permission from a SCORM learning material'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like edubase_get_scorm_permission (read) and edubase_post_scorm_permission (add), making the tool's action unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., edubase_delete_quiz_permission, edubase_delete_exam_permission) or what prerequisites exist (e.g., user must exist, SCORM must exist). The description is silent on when-not-to-use and does not mention any context or exclusions.

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