native_undeploy

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the destructive action ('remove') and optional restore, but does not describe side effects, irreversibility, permissions, or what happens to existing backups or game_dir contents. This is insufficient for a destructive tool.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and concise to the point of zero waste. It efficiently conveys both the core function and an optional behavior without redundancy.

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 has 5 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides minimal context: it does not explain what sidecar files are, how to specify them, what the restore_backup option entails, or what the tool returns. This is inadequate for an operation of this complexity.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only hints at the restore_backup parameter ('optionally restore newest backup'). The other four parameters (kit, game_dir, proxy_name, dest_subdir) are not explained, leaving key semantics to the schema alone.

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 tool's action: 'Remove deployed sidecar files; optionally restore newest backup.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'remove deployed sidecar files' distinguishes it from siblings like native_deploy and native_run.

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 as the inverse of native_deploy, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. The stated action makes the use case fairly evident, but no explicit guidance is provided.

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