pennylane_remove_dossier

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

Annotations already disclose destructive=true, readOnly=false, and idempotent=false, so the safety profile is structured. The description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: if the removed dossier was active, the first remaining dossier automatically becomes active. It does not add further details such as permission requirements or irreversibility beyond the destructive hint.

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 short sentences with no wasted words. The deletion action is front-loaded, and the active-dossier fallback follows immediately as relevant behavior.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering returns, the description is nearly complete. It states the deletion and the active-dossier side effect, though it omits prerequisites or alternatives that might help an agent decide when to use it.

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 100%, with the sole parameter 'slug' documented as 'Slug du dossier à supprimer.' The description does not add meaning, format, or constraints beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Supprime un dossier comptable de la configuration'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling dossiers tools such as add, list, current, and switch. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like switch_dossier or add_dossier. Usage is only implied by the deletion verb, with no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions stated.

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