Remove Node

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

Since there are no annotations, the description carries the full load for behavioral disclosure. It reveals the key behavior that edges are removed along with the node and gives a rationale for this. However, it does not cover other behaviors such as irreversibility, error conditions, or what happens if the node does not exist.

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 two sentences: the first states the action and scope; the second explains the deliberate cascade design. There is no unnecessary repetition or filler, and the core information is front-loaded.

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 two-parameter, no-schema, no-output tool, the description covers the critical information: the operation removes a node and its edges. The rationale for avoiding dangling edges gives additional context that is sufficient for basic use. It lacks explicit mention of return or error scenarios, but those are less critical for this simple operation.

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?

The input schema already provides clear descriptions and 100% coverage for both node_id and workflow_id. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level explanation besides contextualizing the cascade of edges, which is a behavior rather than a parameter-specific meaning. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool removes a node and every edge touching it, and explains that edges are removed deliberately to prevent dangling references. This specific verb and scope distinguishes it from the sibling remove_edge, making the tool's purpose 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?

The tool is clearly meant for removing nodes and their associated edges, but the description does not explicitly mention when to use it versus remove_edge for single-edge deletions. It provides context through the deliberate edge cascade but lacks an explicit when/when-not statement or alternative guidance.

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