pihole_remove_from_whitelist

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. While 'Remove' implies a destructive mutation, it doesn't specify whether this requires admin permissions, if the change is permanent/reversible, what happens if the domain isn't in the whitelist, 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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it immediately scannable and 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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after removal (e.g., does blocking resume immediately?), potential error conditions, or return values. Given the complexity of modifying system configurations, more context is needed.

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% (the single 'domain' parameter is fully documented in the schema), so the baseline score is 3. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's already in the schema, but it doesn't need to since the schema is comprehensive.

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 resource ('domain from the Pi-hole whitelist'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'pihole_remove_from_blacklist' beyond the obvious whitelist vs blacklist distinction, which is why it doesn't achieve 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_remove_from_blacklist' or 'pihole_add_to_whitelist'. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., the domain must already be in the whitelist) or contextual considerations, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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