remove_repo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions the scope ('from the saved list') which hints that the actual GitHub repo is unaffected, but it does not disclose side effects like irreversibility, error behavior for non-existent repos, or any required permissions. This is minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

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 sentence that is directly to the point. There is zero waste, and it is front-loaded with the action. It achieves maximum conciseness for a simple tool.

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, no annotations—the description plus schema provides sufficient context for correct invocation. It clarifies the target of the removal and the parameter format. Minor gaps like error handling are not critical for such a simple 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?

The schema provides 100% coverage with a clear description of the 'repo' parameter including the required format. The tool description adds no further parameter semantics, so the baseline of 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 clearly states the action ('Remove'), the resource ('a GitHub repository'), and the scope ('from the saved list'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_repos and add_repo, making the purpose 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?

Usage is implied by the name and description: use when you want to remove a repo from the saved list. However, there is no explicit comparison to alternatives or exclusions, such as noting that this does not delete the actual GitHub repo or that add_repo is used for adding.

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