bowire.auth-recording.remove

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose non-obvious traits: idempotency, that a result is reported indicating whether a file was removed, and that the default path is a two-step confirmation. It stops short of stating permission requirements or whether a removed recording is recoverable.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler, front-loading the action before the idempotency and confirmation details. Every clause earns its place.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand alone; it covers the action, idempotency, result signaling and the confirmation flow. It leaves unaddressed the destructive-operation concerns an agent would want — authorization scope and reversibility of the deletion.

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%, so 3 is the baseline, but the description adds a relationship the schema does not: that confirm=true and confirmationToken are alternative ways to satisfy the same pending-confirmation step rather than independent options. That is genuine meaning beyond the per-field descriptions.

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+resource ("Delete a captured auth recording") that is unambiguous against siblings like bowire.auth-recording.list, .capture and .capture-flow. An agent can identify this as the destructive counterpart to the recording-capture tools without opening the schema.

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 explains how to invoke it (two-step by default, bypass via confirm=true or a confirmationToken) but never states when this tool is appropriate versus alternatives, nor any prerequisite such as the recording having been captured first. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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