quitar_manual

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing effects. It states the side effect (removal from the index) and the non-effect (the PDF remains), which is genuinely useful. It does not mention reversibility, errors, or return behavior, but the operation is simple enough that this is a minor 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with a valuable parenthetical clarification. There is no fluff, and every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is largely sufficient: it defines the action, scope, and a critical non-destructive guarantee. The main missing piece is explicit parameter semantics, but the tool's low complexity keeps this from being a serious gap.

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 0%, and the description does not explicitly document the 'id' parameter. However, the phrase 'un manual del índice' implies that the id refers to the manual being removed, providing partial semantic context that the bare integer schema lacks.

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 names a specific action and resource: it removes a manual from the index and explicitly clarifies that it does not delete the PDF. This distinguishes it from file-deletion operations and sibling tools such as quitar_documento.

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?

It provides clear scope context ('del índice') and an explicit when-not ('no borra el PDF'), which helps an agent avoid using it for PDF deletion. It does not name an alternative tool for actually deleting the PDF, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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