Spr remove sprinkler head

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds only a cryptic rule reference and says nothing about cascading effects on connected pipes/nodes or irreversibility — useful additions but not required given the 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?

Two short lines with the action stated first and no filler. The rule-reference line is terse but its meaning is opaque without external context, which slightly detracts from structure.

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 tool with no output schema this is minimally adequate: action, key, and a compliance pointer are present. It omits what happens to dependent sprinkler network elements on removal, which an agent invoking a destructive delete would benefit from knowing.

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?

One parameter at 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents 'id'. The description's 'by ID' restates rather than enriches that, making the baseline 3 correct.

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?

Clear specific verb+resource: 'Remove a sprinkler head by ID'. An agent can distinguish it from spr_add_sprinkler_head and spr_update_sprinkler_head by the verb alone, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with the sibling removal tools (spr_remove_node, spr_remove_pipe).

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 embedded '[bulc-mcp rules] SPR-010, SPR-011 — bulc_knowledge_search "<id>"' note hints that a rules lookup is expected before removal, which is implied usage guidance, but there is no statement of when to use this versus other removal tools or any stated prerequisites in prose.

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