service_remove

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description details what happens: 'Deletes the service definition and shuts down its tasks — no confirmation, no undo.' This adds crucial irreversible-behavior context. No contradiction with annotations.

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 tight and well-organized: purpose, prerequisites, effects, alternative, then args/returns. Every sentence delivers value with no redundancy, front-loading the primary action.

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 single-parameter destructive service removal, the description covers prerequisites, behavior, alternatives, and return value. Paired with the destructiveHint annotation and output schema, this is complete for an AI agent to use it 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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining the sole parameter ('id_or_name - The service id or name') and the return value ('True after the service is removed'). While the parameter explanation is minimal, it clarifies the expected input and output, which is adequate for this simple tool.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Stop and remove a swarm service.' It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming service_scale as an alternative for non-destructive stopping, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It states a prerequisite ('Requires a swarm manager') and explicitly provides an alternative usage scenario: 'To stop work but keep the definition, `service_scale` to 0 replicas.' This gives clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guidance.

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