resy_remove_favorite

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

The annotation already states readOnlyHint=false, indicating the tool mutates state. The description adds no further behavioral traits – no idempotency, side effects, consent requirements, or failure behavior. It simply restates the action, providing no transparency beyond what the annotation already offers.

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 a single short sentence that front-loads the action and critical information. Every word contributes; there is no filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (one required param, no output schema) and annotations cover the basic safety profile. The description fully identifies the action and parameter. Minor omissions like error conditions or prerequisite that the venue must already be a favorite are not critical given the low complexity.

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 explain the parameter. It names 'venue_id' and indicates it identifies the venue to remove, but does not clarify how to source it (e.g., from resy_search_venues) or any additional context. For a single integer parameter, this is minimally adequate but adds little beyond the parameter name itself.

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 ('Remove'), a specific resource ('a venue from the user's favorites'), and the required parameter ('by venue_id'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like resy_add_favorite and resy_list_favorites, and even from resy_remove_notify which targets a different resource.

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 implied: remove a favorite by providing venue_id. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and does not mention alternatives such as resy_remove_notify or when not to use this tool (e.g., if the venue is not a favorite). It relies on the agent to infer context from sibling names.

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