Remove source from scene

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the operation is high-impact and requires confirmation, and clarifies that the source is not destroyed. It also hints at the confirm parameter's role. However, it doesn't detail the consequence of confirm=false, reversibility, or prerequisites like scene/source existence, leaving some gaps.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and no fluff. Each sentence provides meaningful information: the operation's scope and the high-impact/confirmation requirement. This is concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, but the description lacks crucial details for an agent to invoke it safely: what happens if confirm is not true, whether the operation is reversible, and what output to expect (though output schema exists). It also doesn't mention preconditions like the source existing in the scene. The description is adequate but has clear 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter explanation. It only addresses confirm indirectly with 'requires confirmation', but does not explain scene_name or source_name beyond their names, nor specify that confirm must be set to true. The description adds minimal value for parameter understanding.

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 a source from a scene') and immediately clarifies the key distinction from sibling tools: it does not delete the source itself, unlike delete_source or show/hide source. This is a specific verb+resource combination with a clear boundary.

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 the intended use case (removing a source while preserving it), which contrasts with deletion. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or explain when not to use it, such as versus hide_source or set_source_visibility_in_all_scenes. The guidance is indirect rather than explicit.

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