remove_bookmark

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds important behavioral context: removing a nonexistent bookmark succeeds as a no-op, which aligns with idempotentHint, and notes authentication requirements and rate limiting.

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?

Three well-structured sentences that are front-loaded with the main action and provide essential details without waste.

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's simplicity (one parameter, rich annotations, output schema present), the description covers all necessary aspects: operation, keying behavior, no-op, auth, siblings, and rate limiting.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by explaining that bookmarks are keyed by post URI (not a separate bookmark-record URI) and that the uri parameter should be the post URI itself, which is not fully clear from the schema description 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 clearly states it removes a private bookmark from a post, specifies the exact AT Protocol method (app.bsky.bookmark.deleteBookmark), and distinguishes from sibling tools like add_bookmark and get_bookmarks.

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?

Explicitly mentions when to use alternatives ('Use add_bookmark to add and get_bookmarks to list') and notes authentication and rate limiting, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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