herdr_worktree_remove

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does exceptionally well. It immediately warns 'Destructive', states exactly what is deleted (worktree checkout), what else happens (closes its workspace), and what is NOT deleted (git branch). This exceeds typical transparency for destructive tools.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with a warning, and every word earns its place. Efficient and clear.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is remarkably complete. It communicates the primary behavior, the secondary effect (closing workspace), and an explicit non-goal (branch deletion), making it a reliable basis for agent invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description need not explain parameters. The description does add context around workspace_id by saying it 'closes its workspace', but this is largely redundant with the schema's 'Workspace of the worktree to remove.' No significant extra value is added for force, though the destructive warning hints at its relevance.

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 uses a specific verb ('deletes') and resource ('worktree checkout') and adds key specificity by noting it also closes the workspace. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like herdr_worktree_create and herdr_worktree_list, and explicitly separates branch deletion via 'Does NOT delete the git branch'.

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?

Provides clear context on what the tool does and indirectly when to use it (when removing a worktree). It explicitly names the alternative for branch deletion ('use git branch -D separately'), giving an exclusion. However, it doesn't explicitly compare to other herdr tools or state prerequisites like needing to list worktrees first.

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