Remove Website

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description's one contribution is the write-gate requirement, WSP_ALLOW_WRITES=true, which is real context not present in the structured fields. It does not explain what removal actually entails (losing verification, effect on sitemaps, whether it is reversible).

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 action front-loaded and no filler. The prerequisite is appended efficiently, though it is cryptic as written, giving no hint about how or where WSP_ALLOW_WRITES is set.

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 one-parameter, single-purpose destructive tool with a fully documented schema and explicit destructive/idempotent annotations, the description plus structured data covers what an agent needs to invoke it. The remaining gap, consequences of removal, is modest given the destructiveHint annotation.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including the exact-match URL and sc-domain: formats. The description adds no meaning beyond that schema text, which is the baseline case for high 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a property from Search Console.' An agent can tell this apart from wsp_add_website_gsc and wsp_show_website_gsc by the verb alone. It stops short of naming the sibling it contrasts with, but the action is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb (call this to delete a property) plus a gating prerequisite, 'Requires WSP_ALLOW_WRITES=true.' There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over wsp_add_website_gsc or how to recover from a mistaken removal.

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