OpenPanel: Decrement property

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful prerequisite and numeric constraint. It does not disclose what happens when the property is missing or non-numeric (error vs. create at -1), nor whether the change is reversible, which are the remaining behavioral gaps.

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?

Two short sentences with the operation stated first and the constraint immediately after. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds no information for the agent but is a minor blemish rather than a structural problem.

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?

This is a destructive mutation with no output schema and zero schema description coverage, so the description needs to do more work than it does. Missing are the semantics of 'value' and 'site', and the failure behavior for a missing or non-numeric property. The prerequisite guidance is good but insufficient for the tool's 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 carry the burden for four parameters. It only implies profile_id and property_name (the latter constrained to numeric) and says nothing about 'site' or 'value', including whether 'value' is the decrement amount or what the default of 1 means. Two of four parameters remain undefined in both schema and 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Decrement a numeric property on a user profile.' The direction of the operation is unambiguous and implicitly distinguishes it from the increment_property sibling. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite and routes the agent to the right tool for the setup step: 'Profile must exist first (use identify_user).' It also states the input constraint that the property must be numeric. It does not state when to prefer decrement over increment or over a direct property-set call, but the directionality makes that largely self-evident.

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