Remove Behavioural Element

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden and does it thoroughly: mutating, creates a model version, changes ir_hash which voids a confirmation, removals are sticky and withhold later extraction reads, 409 referenced naming blockers, 404 unknown_element, and a 403 escalation flow with an escalation_id that must be reported and polled via list_proposals rather than retried.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and severity, with error cases and escalation guidance following in a logical order. It is dense and slightly repetitive at points (the 'remove only what documentation shows' line restates the opening), keeping it below a 5.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description still notes the response includes the model as it now stands with a 'removed' list. Combined with full error and escalation coverage for a mutating tool, nothing needed to invoke it correctly is 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 75%, so the schema documents most parameters already. The description adds the semantics that element_id may be matched 'under its id or another' and that collection indexes get_behavioural_model's ir, but says nothing about server_version and little beyond the schema for model_id. Baseline 3 fits.

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+resource ('Remove an element of a model's behavioural model') with the scope clarified as wiping an erroneous extraction, not real content. The sibling edit_behavioural_element is explicitly contrasted (writing under a removed id withdraws the removal), so the agent can separate the two.

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?

Gives when-to-use ('what the documentation or the code shows the system does not have'), explicit when-not ('never to clear a question'), prerequisites (element must no longer be named by an action, channel, copy, claim or zone placement), and the alternative path (edit/remove those first).

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