remove_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'remove', which implies deletion, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., irreversible? permissions needed? impact on queue state). Insufficient for an agent to understand operational consequences.

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 brief sentence, which is concise but borderline under-specified. It could include more context without losing conciseness, such as noting the job is removed permanently.

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?

With no output schema and simple functionality, the description should still clarify return behavior (e.g., success/failure indication) or error conditions. The current text leaves gaps for an agent relying solely on this definition.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described as 'Job ID' and 'Queue name'. The description adds no further meaning, such as valid formats or constraints. With high coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate; no extra value from description.

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 removes a job from the queue with a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('job'). It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'add_job' and 'retry_job', though it could be more precise by specifying the removal by ID from a named queue.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'retry_job' or 'promote_job'), or prerequisites like job existence or queue state. The description only states what it does, not the appropriate context.

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