git_worktree_remove

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

The description explains explicit execution timing and the behavior of different on_timeout options (continue_background, kill, return_partial). This adds transparency beyond none annotations. However, it omits the core destructive behavior (removing a worktree) and the tool's actual effect.

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 short but not concise. It opens with 'Kali Agent MCP tool' which adds no value. The content is skewed entirely toward timing, neglecting the main action, making it inefficient for an agent.

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?

Given 8 parameters, 2 required, no schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain the tool's purpose, required inputs, or output. Only a narrow aspect (timing) is covered, leaving the agent without sufficient information to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds little to parameter understanding. It mentions timing parameters (expected_runtime_seconds, etc.) but does not define them or explain their relationship to the tool. Required parameters 'path' and 'worktree' are not described at all.

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 does not explicitly state that the tool removes a git worktree. The core function is implied by the name but not articulated. The description instead focuses on execution timing, leaving the agent unclear about the tool's primary purpose.

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 git_worktree_remove versus sibling tools like git_worktree_create or git_worktree_list. There is no context for selection or prerequisites. The only guidance is on choosing timing parameters, which is tangential to tool selection.

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