pihole_remove_from_blacklist

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Remove' implies a mutation operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires admin permissions, whether the change is immediate or requires a service restart, what happens if the domain isn't currently blacklisted, or any rate limits. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a mutation 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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter and gets straight to the point.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what happens after removal (e.g., whether queries for that domain will now be permitted), what the return value might be, or any error conditions. Given the tool's complexity and lack of structured behavioral information, the description should provide more operational context.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'domain' clearly documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the structured schema, so it meets the baseline expectation for tools with comprehensive schema coverage.

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 action ('Remove') and target resource ('domain from the Pi-hole blacklist'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'pihole_remove_from_whitelist' beyond the obvious blacklist vs whitelist distinction, which is why it doesn't reach a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'pihole_get_blacklist' to check what's currently blacklisted, or whether removal requires specific conditions. It simply states what the tool does without context about appropriate usage scenarios.

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