uninstall_extension

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveness, but the description adds meaningful behavioral nuance: the BTAP bridge cannot uninstall itself, and the confirm dialog has a conditional recommendation. This goes beyond the structured hints without contradicting them.

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 with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the caveats are compact and directly relevant to safe invocation.

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 description covers the core call, safety caveats, and a self-imposed limitation. Given that an output schema exists and annotations provide the destructive/open-world context, the description is nearly complete; only session_id semantics are missing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains extension_id and show_confirm_dialog semantics well, but session_id is left entirely unexplained. Partial compensation, with a clear gap for one parameter.

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 gives a specific verb ('Uninstall'), a specific resource ('another installed extension'), and the key identifier ('by id'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like set_extension_enabled and list_extensions.

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?

Provides direct usage guidance: show_confirm_dialog should only be false for an explicitly selected disposable/test extension, and the tool cannot uninstall itself through the active bridge. It does not explicitly contrast with disabling an extension, but the context is clear.

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