remove_doc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'Remove' which implies destructive action, but does not disclose whether the operation is permanent, reversible, or what happens to underlying files vs index entries. The mention of source types adds scope context, but key behavioral traits (side effects, reversibility) are missing.

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 appropriately sized: a one-sentence purpose, a one-sentence scope clarification, and a brief args section. Every sentence earns its place, and the key detail (slug) is 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 a single parameter, an output schema exists, and the tool is relatively simple, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, what it works on, and what the slug parameter means. It lacks notes on side effects or prerequisites, but for a one-arg removal tool this is reasonably complete.

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 input schema provides no description for the 'slug' parameter, and schema coverage is 0%. The description fully compensates by defining slug as 'Documentation slug to remove' and giving an example ('async'), which gives the agent clear semantic meaning.

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 begins with a clear, specific verb+resource: "Remove documentation by slug". It immediately distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_docs, search_docs, and download_doc by stating its core function and the argument (slug).

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 states "regardless of source type" and lists the supported source types (downloaded devdocs.io bundles, local sources, web sources), making it clear this is the universal removal tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is well-defined.

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