remove_issue_label

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool removes exactly one label (a destructive operation) and errors if the label is not present. However, it does not mention permissions, side effects, or return value. This is adequate but not rich.

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 long with no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds critical information: what the tool does, what parameter to use, how to get the correct value, and an error condition. Extremely efficient.

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 removal tool with no output schema and all parameters described, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects: the action, the required parameter format, and an error case. It does not need to explain return values. Complete for the complexity level.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by clarifying that 'id' is the label ID (not name) and pointing to list_labels as the source. It also explains the defaults for 'repo' and 'owner', which are not detailed in the schema.

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 'Remove ONE label from an issue,' specifying the verb (remove) and resource (label from an issue). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_issue_labels, replace_issue_labels, and clear_issue_labels by emphasizing that it removes exactly one label.

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 provides explicit guidance on the parameter 'id': it must be the label ID (number), not the name, and that the ID can be obtained from list_labels. It also notes an error condition if the label is not on the issue. While it doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives, the context of sibling tools and the 'ONE label' phrasing imply when to use this tool.

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