remove_mylist_part

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

The description adds 'permanently' (irreversibility) and 'explicit approval' (confirmation requirement), which go beyond the destructiveHint annotation. It also specifies the operation affects a single part, providing useful behavioral context not fully captured by the annotations.

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, information-dense sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and every element carries meaning relevant to invoking the tool correctly.

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 destructive nature, the schema without parameter descriptions, and no output schema, the description is too brief. It doesn't explain how to obtain list_id, what the unique_id format is, or the exact role of confirm beyond 'explicit approval'. The description is minimally viable but leaves notable gaps.

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 has zero description coverage, and the description only hints at unique_id as the identified part and confirm as the approval. It does not explain list_id, account_id, created_by, or the required confirm constant, leaving most parameters semantically undefined.

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 identifies the action ('permanently remove'), the target ('one identified part' from a 'DigiKey MyList'), and the condition ('after explicit approval'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_mylist (whole list) and add_parts_to_mylist (adding parts).

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 implies usage when a single part needs to be removed from a MyList, and the phrase 'one identified part' sets clear context for a focused removal operation. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, such as using delete_mylist for an entire list or add_parts_to_mylist for additions.

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