delete_footnote_robust

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions 'comprehensive cleanup and orphan removal' and specifies removal from 'document.xml, footnotes.xml, and relationships', which adds some behavioral context beyond a basic delete. However, it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or what 'orphan removal' entails operationally.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: the first states the core action and key features, the second specifies the affected files. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the complexity.

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 no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and 4 parameters, the description is incomplete. It covers the tool's scope and affected components but misses parameter explanations, error conditions, and output details, which are critical for a destructive operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It doesn't explain any of the 4 parameters (filename, footnote_id, search_text, clean_orphans), leaving their purposes and interactions unclear. The mention of 'orphan removal' hints at 'clean_orphans' but is insufficient.

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 ('Delete footnote') and specifies the scope ('with comprehensive cleanup and orphan removal'), distinguishing it from the simpler sibling 'delete_footnote_from_document'. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with all sibling tools beyond naming differences.

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 like 'delete_footnote_from_document' is provided. The description implies a more thorough deletion process but doesn't specify scenarios or prerequisites for choosing this robust version.

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