remove_section

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description stays consistent by saying 'Delete one or more sections.' It adds that deletion is scoped to section IDs, but it does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, what happens to elements referencing deleted sections, or any cascading effects. This is moderate added context, not full transparency.

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 core action. The Chinese translations in parentheses duplicate the English text, and the Args block repeats the same information, but there is no filler or irrelevant detail.

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 tool with no output schema, the call mechanics are mostly covered: what to delete and how to format ids. However, it leaves out destructive consequences and the distinction from remove_unused_sections, so an agent invoking it on a real model is missing safety-relevant context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates. It explains that ids are section IDs and, crucially, that the string variant is a range like '3to5' — a detail the schema's plain anyOf string would not reveal. This is strong added semantics for the only parameter.

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 verb and resource: 'Delete one or more sections from the model.' It is unambiguous about the operation, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the close sibling remove_unused_sections, relying instead on the 'ids' parameter to imply user-selected sections.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it deletes specific sections by ID as opposed to remove_unused_sections, nor does it state any prerequisites or consequences that would help an agent choose it correctly.

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