remove_modifier

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the action ('Remove a modifier') without revealing side effects (permanent deletion), error handling (if modifier not found), or any irreversible consequences. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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 with no unnecessary words. It states the action and the object effectively, and nothing could be removed without loss of clarity.

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 remove operation with two clear parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage guidance and behavioral transparency, which are important given the numerous modifier-related sibling tools. An agent could call it correctly but may not know when it's appropriate or what to expect.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but the parameter names (object_name, modifier_name) are self-explanatory. The description reinforces that the modifier is removed from the object, mapping to the two parameters. It adds some meaning but does not elaborate on formats or edge cases.

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 clear verb ('Remove') and resource ('a modifier from an object'), and the tool name aligns. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_modifier and list_modifiers, though it doesn't explicitly name them; the intent is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as requiring the modifier to exist first (e.g., list_modifiers) or differences from apply_modifier or set_modifier_param. The description is purely a statement of action with no context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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