Remove Xpresso Graph Node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses that the node is deleted and that all incoming/outgoing connections are severed automatically, which are the critical behavioral side effects. It does not mention return values or invalid-handle behavior, but for a one-parameter destructive tool this is reasonable coverage.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by the handle requirement and the key side effect, all in minimal space.

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 simple single-parameter destructive operation, the description covers the action, how to source the handle, and the important connection-severing behavior. It does not state whether the deletion is undoable or what is returned, but the absence of an output schema and the single-parameter design keep this gap small.

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 already documents the 'handle' parameter with 100% coverage, but the description adds meaningful semantics by explaining that the handle must point at the target and by pointing the agent to list_xpresso_nodes to discover the path id. This goes beyond the bare schema property text.

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 and resource: 'Delete a GvNode from an Xpresso graph.' This clearly defines the tool and distinguishes it from the sibling 'remove_graph_node' by naming the Xpresso graph context.

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?

It provides actionable guidance: the handle must be a gv_node handle and the user should use list_xpresso_nodes to discover the target's path id. It does not explicitly contrast with remove_graph_node or state when not to use this tool, so there is slight ambiguity among graph-deletion siblings.

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