Remove Hyperlink

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

The description discloses several non-obvious behaviors beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it removes both shape-level and run-level links, drops orphaned link rels, preserves media playback affordances, and saves atomically with a two-slot backup. This gives the agent a strong model of side effects.

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 dense but every sentence contributes critical information: target syntax, scope of removal, side effects, and save behavior. It is front-loaded with the core action and uses compact, precise phrasing without redundancy.

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 complexity and the existence of an output schema, the description is largely complete: target semantics, side effects, and backup behavior are all specified. The only notable gap is the lack of any explanation for file_path and slide, which are required parameters.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description carries the burden for parameters. It thoroughly explains the target parameter and the backup parameter, but file_path and slide are left implicit and are not described anywhere. Overall it adds substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action ('Remove hyperlinks from a shape or text range') with a clear resource and granular scope. It distinguishes itself from related siblings like set_hyperlink and list_hyperlinks by the verb and by detailing two target modes.

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 clear context for when to use each target form: shape id for the whole shape including runs, and a paragraph/range object for only covered runs. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage conditions are effectively embedded in the target semantics.

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