remove_node

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is a destructive write operation. The description adds important context that the operation removes not only the node but also its children, which is behavior beyond the basic annotation.

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 a single, focused sentence that immediately conveys the core action. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no redundant or filler content. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 straightforward deletion tool with three fully documented parameters and clear annotations, the description is sufficient. It conveys the essential behavior (including child deletion) without requiring extensive explanation. It could mention error cases or whether changes persist to disk, but given the schema and annotation support, the description meets the needs for effective selection and 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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (projectPath, scenePath, nodePath). The description does not add any additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already specifies, so the baseline of 3 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 uses a specific verb 'remove' with a clear resource 'node (and its children)' from a 'scene', making the tool's function unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like add_node, reparent_node, or rename_node, which have different operations.

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 implies usage (when you need to delete a node from a scene) but does not provide explicit guidance on conditions, exclusions, or alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use this tool or how it compares to similar operations like remove_from_group.

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