removePrivacyNative

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the removal action and a safety warning, but omits any details about side effects, reversibility, authentication requirements, or what happens to related data.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two clear sentences. The first sentence leads with the purpose, and the second provides a critical safety note. No unnecessary words.

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 removal tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks critical context such as what a 'native' blocker is, prerequisites, expected outcome, or how it differs from similar sibling tools. The safety note hints at risk but does not fully compensate.

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%, with both parameters already described in the input schema. The tool description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 ('Removes') and the resource ('native tracking protection blocker'), and the distinction from sibling tools like 'removePrivacyBlocklist' is implicit through the 'native' qualifier, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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 only usage guidance is a safety note indicating it should be used only with designated test profiles. There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., removePrivacyBlocklist), nor any exclusion criteria.

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