uninstall_pack

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects. It does state that uninstall works by disabling all servers and returns a dictionary with results, but it doesn't clarify whether the pack is deleted or merely deactivated, nor reversibility or permission requirements.

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?

Very concise: one sentence of purpose, then an Args/Returns structure with no fluff. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description omits important details about side effects and prerequisites. The mention of output schema covers return format, but the ambiguity between uninstall and disable leaves a gap. For an agent, it's probably sufficient to select the tool, but not fully complete.

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?

Description says 'Name of the pack to uninstall', which adds context to the schema's title 'Pack Name'. However, it's minimal and essentially restates the obvious; no format or constraints are added.

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?

Clearly states the action (uninstall) and the resource (a pack), and specifies the mechanism (disabling all servers), which distinguishes it from siblings like install_pack and disable_server.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like remove_server_from_pack or disable_server. The description is self-contained but does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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