goods_remove

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Remove' indicating a destructive action, but does not disclose if the operation is reversible, any side effects, or required permissions. For a simple deletion, this is minimal transparency.

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 with two sentences and an Args list. Every sentence earns its place, and the main action is front-loaded. No wasted 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 simple removal tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on error behavior (e.g., what if name not found) and confirmation requirements. It borders on minimal.

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%, but the description adds an Args section specifying that the name must be exact. This adds meaningful information beyond the schema, though it could be more detailed (e.g., case-sensitivity).

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'), the resource ('a good'), the scope ('from local catalog'), and the condition ('by exact name'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like goods_add and goods_list.

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 implies the name must be exact, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention common pitfalls such as case sensitivity or what happens if the name does not match.

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