mounts-remove

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations already provide. The destructiveHint=true annotation indicates destruction, but the description adds no context about side effects, irreversibility, or required permissions.

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?

While incredibly short, the description is under-specified. It fails to convey any useful information to the agent, making it insufficiently concise rather than efficiently so.

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 simple structure (one required parameter, no output schema), the description should at least explain what a mount is and what removal entails. It does not, leaving the agent with incomplete 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 only parameter 'mountId' is not described at all. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description provides no meaning or guidance on how to obtain or format this identifier.

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 is just 'POST /mounts.remove', which essentially restates the tool name. It does not explain what removing a mount does or what a mount is. It's a tautology, providing no added clarity beyond the name.

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 like mounts-update or mounts-one. There is no mention of prerequisites, caution, or when removal is appropriate.

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