remove_from_dictionary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the deletion behavior and comma-separated input. However, it does not mention what happens if the word does not exist, or if there are any irreversible side effects. The destructive nature is implied but not fully detailed.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb (削除します/delete). No unnecessary words or 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is largely complete. It explains the action and input format. It could mention whether deletion is permanent or if there is a confirmation step, but overall adequate for the agent to invoke correctly.

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% (single parameter with description). The description adds the comma separation detail but does not provide significant meaning beyond the schema. With high coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (削除する/delete) and the resource (カスタム辞書/custom dictionary). It also specifies that multiple entries can be deleted with comma separation. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_to_dictionary (adds) and list_dictionary (lists).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the function is implied by the name and sibling tools: use for deletion, not for adding or listing. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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