remove_flow_from_scenario

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly states the removal action but does not specify side effects such as reindexing of remaining flows, error behavior on invalid index, or permanence. The transparency is adequate but not detailed.

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?

One clear sentence, no redundancy. The essential information is 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?

Given the simple mutation nature and no output schema, the description covers the necessary context. It could mention whether the removal is permanent or any return value, but these are not critical for a straightforward removal operation.

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 schema covers only one of three parameters with a description (project), giving 33% coverage. The description partially compensates by explaining 'index' (by its index) and 'scenarioId' (a scenario), but does not define them fully or clarify the index type (e.g., zero-based).

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 action ('Remove'), a specific object ('one of a scenario's composed flows'), and the method ('by its index'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like add_flow_to_scenario and remove_scenario_dataset.

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 action implies when to use it (when you need to remove a flow from a scenario by its index), but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or mention prerequisites like obtaining the index. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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