Remove Tool Secret

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

The description does not disclose the destructive nature of the operation beyond the verb 'Remove'. Annotations only include openWorldHint, so the description carries full burden. It lacks details on side effects, error handling, or required permissions. No behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose. It is concise and efficient, though it could be considered too terse. Every word serves a function, but additional context might be expected.

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 (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate for a basic remove operation. However, it lacks details on expected outcomes, error scenarios, or idempotency. Without an output schema, the description could explain return values or status cues to be more complete.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, explaining both 'id' and 'key'. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description adds no extra value over the schema.

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 the action ('Remove') and the resource ('a secret from a tool integration'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'neuron_add_tool_secret' which does the opposite. There is no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, when not to use it, or any prerequisites. It only implies usage through the action verb. No explicit context or exclusions are given.

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