excluir_campo_formulario_pipeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the tool removes a field, but does not disclose consequences, required permissions, reversibility, or side effects. For a destructive operation, this is insufficient.

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 two sentences: one for the action and one for the prerequisite. It is concise, front-loaded with key information, and contains no unnecessary words.

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 has only one parameter and many siblings, the description adequately states the purpose and provides a key prerequisite. It could mention that the field must exist or specify return values, but overall it is sufficient for a simple deletion tool.

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 coverage is 0% as the description does not mention the parameter. However, it indirectly explains that the 'id' parameter is the field ID obtained via another tool. The compensation is partial, as it does not describe the parameter type or constraints.

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 tool removes a field from a section of the business form of a pipeline. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'excluir_secao_formulario_pipeline' which removes a section, and 'excluir_campo_formulario_proposta' which removes a field from a proposal form.

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 provides a prerequisite to use 'buscar_formulario_pipeline' to obtain the field ID. This gives clear context on when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives.

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