host_remove

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description aligns by stating the host is removed from configuration. It adds that the return value is a confirmation string, but does not disclose details like irreversibility, permission requirements, or effects on related data. With destructive annotation present, this is adequate but not enriched.

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 short and front-loaded with the main action. The Args and Returns sections are minimal but functional, and there is no filler. It could be slightly more explicit about the parameter semantics, but overall well-structured.

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 one-parameter destructive operation, the description plus annotations (destructive, idempotent) and output schema give an agent enough to call it correctly. It names the input, the effect, and the return type. It doesn't discuss failure modes, but that level of completeness is not essential here.

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 tool description only repeats the argument name ('name') without adding meaning. Although the nested schema property has a description, the reported schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate; it does not explain what names are valid or how the name maps to a configured host.

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 a specific verb ('torlese' = deletion) and resource ('tavoli gep' / remote machine from configuration), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like host_add, host_list, and host_test. The action is unambiguous and the resource scope is defined.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative conditions are provided. However, the deletion semantics imply it is for removing a configured remote host, and the sibling set includes host_add for the opposite operation. No prerequisites, exclusions, or when-not-to-use guidance are given.

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