energy_remove_energy_source

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

The description discloses a key side effect (strips matching grid `flow_from` entries), which goes beyond a simple 'remove'. However, no details on reversibility, required permissions, or error behavior. Without annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it is partially adequate.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, no unnecessary words. Every part is informative.

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 single-parameter tool with a described side effect, the description is mostly complete. It lacks expectations for invalid identifiers or confirmation of success, but the presence of an output schema partially mitigates this.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter `stat_energy_from`. The description clarifies that it identifies the energy source, adding meaning beyond the bare type. This compensates for the schema gap.

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 ('Remove an energy source') and specifies the identifier (`stat_energy_from`), distinguishing it from sibling tools like `energy_add_solar_source` or `energy_add_battery_source`. It also notes an additional side effect (strips matching grid `flow_from` entries).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, or what prerequisites or conditions apply. No mention of when not to use it or potential pitfalls.

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