Remove a screenshot

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive (destructiveHint: true), so the mutation is known. The description adds a valuable behavioral guarantee beyond the annotations: 'The remaining screenshots keep their relative order,' which clarifies a non-obvious post-condition. It also states the ownership requirement.

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?

Two short sentences carry both the action/scope and the key behavioral details with zero filler. The most important information (what it removes, ownership constraint) is front-loaded.

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 destructive action with annotations already covering safety, the description includes everything needed: the action, ownership restriction, id source, and the post-condition about relative order. No output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary, and no critical information is missing.

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 100%, and the single parameter 'screenshotId' is already described as 'Screenshot id, from get_game.' The description repeats this source instruction but adds no further semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Removes'), a clear resource ('a screenshot'), and scope ('from a game you own'). It naturally distinguishes itself from siblings like add_screenshot, reorder_screenshots, and set_cover, so an agent can tell what it does without ambiguity.

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 provides explicit context: the operation applies only to games you own and the screenshot id must come from get_game. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the ownership precondition and id source give clear usage guidance.

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