remove_watch_dir

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the directory is removed from the watch list; it does not mention whether the operation is persistent, idempotent, or what happens if the path is not currently watched.

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?

A single short sentence conveys the core action with no filler or repetition. The essential information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete: the agent knows what action to take and what parameter to provide. It would benefit from a little more behavioral context, but the simplicity of the tool keeps the gap small.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'path' refers to a directory in the watch list, but it does not specify path format, absolute vs relative, or behavior for invalid paths. This is minimal but non-redundant value.

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 states a specific verb ('Elimina'), a clear resource ('directorio del watch list'), and is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like add_watch_dir and list_watch_dirs. There is no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 intended use is implied: use this when a directory should no longer be watched. However, the description provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives such as unwatch_hipocampo, nor does it mention prerequisites or edge cases.

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