lib_uninstall_library

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only states that the library is unregistered. It does not disclose whether the underlying files are deleted, whether the operation is reversible, what permissions are required, or how it affects open projects.

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 short and front-loads the purpose before the Args/Returns sections. The structured framing is efficient, though the Args section partially duplicates the schema and could be slightly leaner.

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 simple one-parameter mutation tool, the description covers the action, parameter meaning, and return shape. However, without annotations and with an output schema already present, it still omits important preconditions and safety context that an agent would need to invoke it confidently.

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 does so by clarifying that library_path is an 'absolute path to the library file,' which adds meaningful format and target information beyond the bare schema title 'Library Path.'

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 ('Unregister') and resource ('library from the environment's Available Libraries'), making the action unambiguous. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling lib_install_library by being the inverse operation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as lib_install_library or lib_reload_library. It also omits preconditions like whether the library must currently be installed, leaving usage to inference.

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