remove_organization_channel

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

The description reveals that the tool returns 'removed=false' when the locator is absent, providing behavioral insight beyond annotations. Annotations indicate idempotent=true and destructiveHint=false, which align with the description.

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 concise with two sentences, no unnecessary words, and front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 simplicity (4 params, 1 required, output schema exists), the description fully covers the necessary context: what it does, how to identify the channel, and the return 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning by explaining the mutual exclusivity of channelId vs provider+value. It clarifies the locator options beyond the schema 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 the action ('Remove') and the resource ('one contact channel from an organization') with specific identification methods. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'add_organization_channel' and 'update_organization_channel'.

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?

The description specifies that the channel must be identified with exactly one locator: channelId, or provider plus value. This gives clear usage guidance, but lacks explicit when-not or alternatives to other tools.

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