Remove trim

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds value beyond them by explaining the destructive scope (trim connections removed, elements restored) and describing the per-item result shape with error handling, which the annotations don't convey.

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?

Three dense sentences that are front-loaded with the operation, then inputs, then return shape. Minimal waste, though the return-format sentence is somewhat verbose for a description when it could be tighter.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description helpfully summarizes the return structure ({results, removedCount}) and gives the cross-reference for inspection. Complete enough for correct invocation, with only minor room to note permission or side-effect details.

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?

With 50% schema coverage, the description compensates by clarifying the semantics of both parameters: pairs as explicit element/trimmingElement couplings and elements as removing every trim connection of those elements 'whether they are trimmed or trimming'. This meaning goes beyond the schema's structural definitions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Removes trim-to-roof/shell connections') and immediately clarifies the effect ('restoring the untrimmed elements'), which lets an agent distinguish it from the inverse sibling trim_elements. The scope is unambiguous without opening the schema.

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?

Explains the two input modes ('Give explicit pairs ... and/or elements') and what 'elements' means, and it routes the agent to get_element_edit_relations for pre-inspection. Clear context for use, though it does not state explicit when-not conditions or name an alternative operation.

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