Disconnect node wire(s)

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false) are present; the description adds context: partial removals with warnings succeed, returns list of removed wires, and probe of Connector API. No contradiction. The description adds behavioral detail beyond 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?

The description is a single paragraph of 4 sentences, front-loading the purpose and then adding detail efficiently. No wasted words. Every sentence 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 the tool's complexity (3 params, 1 required, no output schema), the description covers purpose, parameter usage, default behavior, error handling, and return value. It is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining defaults ('removes every incoming wire') and how from_path and to_input narrow the scope. It also mentions return value, which is not in schema.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Remove one or more input wires from a node in TouchDesigner.' It uses specific verb+resource (remove wires) and distinguishes from the sibling 'connect_nodes' by explicitly calling it 'the inverse of connect_nodes.'

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 explains when to use the tool and how to narrow scope: 'By default removes every incoming wire into to_path; narrow the scope with from_path... and/or to_input.' It also clarifies error behavior: 'Fatal only when to_path is not found — partial removals with per-wire warnings still succeed.' It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is clear.

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