blueprint_remove_function

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose the additional behavior of compiling and saving after removal, which is useful. However, it does not mention whether the operation is irreversible, if it requires specific permissions, or what happens if the function graph 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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds value, and it avoids restating the tool name or schema fields.

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 tool with only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what it does and its side effects. It is adequate for the simplicity of the operation, though it could mention irreversible consequences or error behavior for extra completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal semantic value by indicating the 'name' parameter is used for identifying the graph, but it does not elaborate on 'blueprint_path' beyond what the schema already provides.

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 specific action (remove), the resource (user function graph), and the method (by name), followed by side effects (compile and save). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like blueprint_add_function or blueprint_compile.

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 implies the tool is used to remove a user function graph by name, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. No mention of alternative tools or prerequisites.

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