Remove Bot from Chat

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety and mutation profile. The description adds context beyond annotations by stating the endpoint uses POST and that it is the inverse operation, which clarifies the behavioral relationship to invite-to-chat. It doesn't contradict annotations; it enriches them with the 'undo' semantic.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place. The action is front-loaded, the endpoint is included, and the relationship plus prerequisite are stated concisely. No filler or redundant content.

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 destructive action with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, the inverse relationship, and how to obtain the required botInstanceId. It doesn't describe the response format or error cases, but those are not expected without an output schema. Given the tool's simplicity and the annotations covering safety, this is adequately 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?

Schema description coverage is 50%, with chatJid and agentId described in the schema, but botInstanceId and agentIdOrAddress lack descriptions. The description compensates by indicating that botInstanceId comes from ethora-bot-instances-list, which is helpful but doesn't fully clarify the other parameters. Since schema already covers chatJid, the description adds some value for botInstanceId but not enough to fully offset the coverage gap.

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?

Clearly states the action: 'Remove a BotInstance from a chat room' with a specific verb and resource. It names the HTTP endpoint and explicitly identifies itself as the inverse of ethora-agent-invite-to-chat, distinguishing it from that sibling. The purpose is unambiguous and differentiates the tool from its peers.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance by stating it is the inverse of ethora-agent-invite-to-chat, implying it should be used to undo an invitation. It also specifies the prerequisite (a bot instance id from ethora-bot-instances-list) and how those instances are created, giving the agent concrete steps to gather required inputs. This covers both context and alternatives.

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