remove_tag

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

The annotations already declare this as destructive and not read-only, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the action itself — it does not state whether deletion is reversible, what happens to frames or cels associated with the tag, or any permission requirements.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the core action efficiently.

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 mutation tool with two required parameters and no schema descriptions or output schema, the description is insufficient. It omits the meaning of 'filename', any behavioral consequences of deletion, and usage context, leaving significant gaps for an agent to call 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'name' parameter indirectly ('by name'), but the 'filename' parameter is never mentioned or clarified, leaving half the required inputs undocumented.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('animation tag') with a clear scope ('by name'). This is unambiguous on its own, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like add_tag or set_tag.

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 provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer when deletion is appropriate.

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