remove_wire

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive (destructiveHint=true), and the description adds valuable behavior: 'Matches wires with endpoints within 0.1mm tolerance (in either order)'. This discloses the matching logic, which is beyond the annotations and helps predict tool behavior.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a matching rule, a usage pointer, and a clear Args block. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 that an output schema exists (not shown), return format need not be described. The description covers the matching tolerance, the prerequisite listing, and the optional path parameter. It omits potential edge cases like no-match behavior, but for a targeted removal tool it is largely complete.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema), so the description fully compensates. The Args block provides meaningful definitions for all parameters: x1/y1 as Start X/Y, x2/y2 as End X/Y, and schematic_path with its default behavior. This goes well beyond the raw 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 states 'Remove a wire segment by its endpoint coordinates' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from other remove_* tools (component, label, junction). It also adds matching tolerance and order flexibility, making the 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 description explicitly instructs to 'Use list_schematic_wires to get wire coordinates first', providing a clear prerequisite and workflow. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the specificity of the tool and the prerequisite make when-to-use clear.

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