remove_nodes

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

The description goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining the dangerous empty-ids behavior, the mandatory confirmation flag, and the explicit guardrail asking user permission before mass deletion. This is strong, safety-relevant disclosure that an agent needs before invoking the tool.

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 well-structured with a clear one-line purpose, Args breakdown, critical instruction, and example. It is slightly longer due to bilingual repetition, but the critical safety instruction and example are worth the space. Overall it is efficient and 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 destructive 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it covers accepted id formats, the all-nodes deletion behavior, the required confirmation, and the LLM safety rule. Nothing essential for correct and safe invocation is missing.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameter understanding. It fully compensates by explaining that ids accepts int, list, or range string '1to10', that leaving it empty deletes ALL nodes, and that confirm_delete_all must be true in that case. This is excellent parameter documentation.

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 and resource: 'Delete nodes from the model'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like remove_elements, remove_section, and remove_boundary. The example invocation further reinforces what the tool does.

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 gives clear context for how to delete specific nodes vs all nodes, explicitly requiring confirm_delete_all=true for the empty-ids case. It also provides a critical when-not rule: do not delete all nodes autonomously and must ask the user first. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives like remove_elements, but the resource is clearly identified.

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