remove_first_run_marker

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the destructive action ('Delete') and idempotency ('Safe to call even if the marker does not exist'), which is adequate for a simple tool. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, usage context, and safety note. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the key action.

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?

The tool is simple and the description covers core behavior. Though an output schema exists, the description does not explain return value, but for a deletion marker this is a minor omission. Still, overall complete for its complexity.

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 has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info (none needed). Baseline 4 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 specifies the verb 'Delete' and the resource '.first-run marker file', clearly indicating the tool's function. It is distinct from sibling tools which generally do not involve deleting marker files.

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 states 'Called at the end of the first-run wizard after all config files are written', providing clear context for use. It also notes safety even if marker doesn't exist, but lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use. However, for this specific tool, usage is well-defined.

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