Unregister Collection

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It states that files on disk are untouched, works even if the directory is gone, and clarifies that it only affects the registry. This is transparent about side effects and safety.

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 concise sentences, with the main action first and the alternative explicitly stated. No redundant wording; every clause adds value.

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 a simple operation with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, the non-destructive effect, the edge case of stale entries, and the alternative tool. It is complete for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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%, but the description adds valuable context: for collectionPath it emphasizes matching by path (not name) and advises using the path from list_collections; for workspacePath it explains the default behavior. This goes beyond the schema's basic definitions.

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 ('Remove') and clearly identifies the resource (workspace registry), while explicitly distinguishing from delete_collection. It also explains the consequence (leaves files untouched) and the connection to list_collections, making it unambiguous.

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?

It explains when to use this tool (to stop an entry from being listed, especially for stale entries) and explicitly points to delete_collection for deletion of the collection itself. This provides clear context for choosing between tools.

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