buildx_remove

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint: true), the description discloses that the tool does not raise on non-zero CLI exit and instructs to inspect `returncode`/`stderr`. It also clarifies the effect on build cache and the `force` flag behavior.

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 well-structured, front-loaded with the primary action, then behavior, parameters, and return format. Each sentence adds value without unnecessary elaboration.

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 destructive tool with no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, behavior, parameter semantics, return value structure, and error handling conventions. It is self-sufficient for an 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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description explains every parameter's meaning, including the mutual exclusivity of `name` and `all_inactive`, and the effect of `keep_state`, `keep_daemon`, and `force`.

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 'Remove a builder instance' and 'Deletes a builder made by `buildx_create`', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like `buildx_prune` and `buildx_create`.

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?

Explicitly contrasts with `buildx_prune`, explaining when to use which: prune reclaims cache while keeping the builder, whereas this removes the builder. Also notes the `keep_state` option affecting cache deletion.

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