remove_marker

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It discloses nothing: no mention of side effects, reversibility, permissions, or return values. The agent knows only that something called 'marker' is removed, with no detail.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification, not conciseness. It does not front-load useful information; it simply repeats the tool name. The single sentence earns no space.

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 tool with no annotations, no parameter descriptions, and no output schema details, this description is entirely inadequate. An agent cannot correctly invoke it without external help. It needs at least a definition of markers and the parameter's meaning.

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?

There is a single parameter 'name' with no description in the schema (0% coverage). The description does not compensate, leaving the agent to guess what 'name' refers to (marker name? object name? etc.) and whether it's a string, exact match, etc.

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 'Blender Studio Pro MCP: remove_marker', which merely restates the tool name with a prefix. It adds no information about what a marker is, what removal entails, or how it differs from siblings like add_marker or list_markers. This is a classic tautology.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, what alternatives exist, or any prerequisites. The description provides zero context for an agent to decide between remove_marker and other marker-related or deletion tools.

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