Sb3 Remove Sprite

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Remove a sprite' and '(proxied)', which does not explain side effects, whether the removal is permanent, whether it affects the current project, or what the output schema contains. The term 'proxied' hints at indirection but is not elaborated.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, which is efficient, but the parenthetical '(proxied)' is cryptic and the brevity sacrifices necessary context. It is concise but not sufficiently informative.

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 the tool has an output schema and one parameter, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the effect on the project, the meaning of 'proxied', or how this relates to sibling sprite tools like sb3_set_sprite or sb3_add_sprite. An agent would need to inspect the output schema and other tools to use it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'name' parameter beyond its literal meaning. The description adds no information about what name refers to (e.g., sprite name, target name) or any constraints, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone.

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 'Remove a sprite. (proxied)' states a clear verb and resource, so an agent knows the tool removes a sprite. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like sb3_remove_costume or sb3_remove_sound, and the term 'proxied' is ambiguous without further explanation.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the sprite must be loaded or selected, nor does it explain what 'proxied' means in terms of usage context.

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