zabbix_module_uninstall

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits like destructiveness, permissions, or side effects. The single sentence fails to do so. For a potentially destructive operation like uninstalling a module, this is a significant gap.

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 (one sentence), but conciseness requires informativeness. This is under-specified rather than concise, lacking essential details about functionality, parameters, and behavior.

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 complexity (uninstalling a module) and the absence of annotations or schema description, the description is completely inadequate. It provides no context about the tool's purpose beyond echoing the name, and does not help the agent understand input, output, or behavior.

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's parameter 'params' has no description and 0% schema coverage. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema itself. The agent has no guidance on what to pass in the params object, leaving it to guess or reference external docs.

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 'Zabbix API module.uninstall method' clearly indicates the action (uninstall) and resource (module), and distinguishes it from siblings like module_install or module_delete. However, it uses jargon ('method') and lacks a plain-language explanation of what uninstalling entails.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., module_delete), nor does it mention prerequisites or side effects. This forces the agent to rely on external knowledge.

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