Remove an element

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description details the cascade behavior, deletion of connections and labels, and implications for groups. It warns about dangling references and when to set cascade=false, providing rich behavioral insight.

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 well-structured: opening purpose statement, usage examples, behavioral detail, and a specific note on groups. Every sentence adds value, no fluff, and it's appropriately compact for the complexity.

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 destructive nature and edge cases (dependencies, groups), the description covers all necessary aspects. It explains when to use, side effects, parameter nuances, and alternative actions. With an output schema present, no return-value explanation is needed.

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 covers all parameters at 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining cascade semantics in depth (when to use false) and the group removal behavior, which goes beyond the schema's simple descriptions.

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 'Delete one element from a scene' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by giving usage examples like 'remove the cache' and contrasts with add_element/update_element. The purpose is unambiguous and well-scoped.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it with 'USE THIS for...' and provides examples. It also gives guidance on when not to use cascade and advises updating the group instead to keep children. This is excellent context for selecting the tool over alternatives.

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