Remove filter

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

The description discloses that the operation is high-impact and requires confirmation, which is useful. However, it does not explain what high-impact means concretely (e.g., permanent deletion) or how confirmation works (e.g., the confirm parameter must be true). With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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 no filler. The most important information 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 that there is an output schema, return values needn't be explained. Yet for a high-impact mutation, the description lacks details about the confirmation flow, error cases (e.g., filter not found), and the irreversible nature. The description is minimal but not fully adequate.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. The text implies the need for source_name and filter_name ('from a source') and the confirmation requirement touches on the confirm parameter. However, it does not explain the boolean semantics (e.g., that confirm must be explicitly set to true) or any constraints on names.

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 action (remove) and the resource (a filter from a source), using a specific verb. It is distinct from sibling tools like add_filter or toggle_filter.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like toggle_filter to disable a filter. The 'High-impact' warning is a caution, not a usage guideline. There is also no mention of prerequisites, such as the filter existing.

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