Remove module (safe)

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real context beyond them: the destructive action is a timestamped move to a trash directory, the BuiltinModules tree is off-limits, and the change is reversible. It stops short of error behavior (missing file) or permission requirements, so it is not a full 5.

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 short sentences with zero filler; the action, its scope limit, and the reversal path are all 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?

For a one-parameter mutation with no output schema and annotations that already cover the safety profile, the description covers what happens, what is protected, and how to undo it. It omits failure behavior for a nonexistent filename and whether the module must be inactive first.

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 100% and the schema already says 'Filename in Modules/', so the baseline is 3. The description goes slightly further by restating the Modules/ location constraint and explicitly excluding BuiltinModules, clarifying the valid domain of the single `file` argument.

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?

States a specific verb (Move/Remove) and resource (a Modules/ file), and pins the exact mechanism (Modules/.trash/ with a timestamp). It also carves out scope (never touches BuiltinModules), which separates it from reanim_list_modules, reanim_get_module_info, and reanim_validate_module.

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 only implied: you call it to remove a module, and you undo it by moving the file back. There is no explicit when-to-use versus reanim_validate_module or reanim_get_module_info, and no stated preconditions (e.g. whether the module must be disabled or unloaded first).

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