dealloc_passive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states that the tool deallocates a node and its dependencies, returning points and stat deltas, but does not mention side effects (e.g., permanence, reversibility, authentication requirements) or error conditions. This is minimal disclosure.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first states the action and input method, the second explains the return value. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter, no annotations, and an output schema (content unknown), the description covers the core functionality and return value. It is adequate for a simple deallocation tool, though it does not address edge cases or prerequisites.

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?

The only parameter 'node' has no schema description (0% coverage). The description clarifies that it can be an id (integer) or name (string), which adds essential meaning. However, it does not provide format examples or constraints beyond the schema's anyOf.

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 uses a specific verb 'Deallocate' and clearly identifies the resource as 'passive node'. It also mentions what the tool returns (points freed and stat deltas), which distinguishes it from siblings like 'alloc_passive' and 'get_passive'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'apply_updates' or 'optimize_passives'), nor does it state prerequisites or conditions for use. The agent is left to infer usage context.

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