Remove Address from Bundle

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true), it discloses the credit cost, the confirm=true gate, the return payload, and the non-obvious invariant that a bundle can never be emptied. It does not detail whether removal is reversible beyond the 'stays in address book' note or what happens on a failed confirm — a small remaining gap.

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?

Four short clauses, each carrying a distinct decision-relevant fact — scope, invariant, precondition, return, cost — with the identity-statement first. No filler.

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 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the destructive side effect, the precondition, the cost, and the response shape ('updated bundle'). Nothing an agent needs to call it safely 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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented. The description only echoes the confirm: true requirement and adds no meaning about bundleId or address formats beyond the schema, so 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 precise verb and resource ('remove one address from a bundle') plus a key scoping fact — the address remains in the address book — which separates it from octav_remove_address_book_entry. An agent can distinguish it from octav_delete_bundle and octav_add_bundle_address without reading any 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?

Gives an explicit boundary condition and names the alternative action: a bundle cannot be emptied, so the last address requires deleting the bundle instead. It also pre-empts confusion with address-book removal by stating the address survives.

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