beta_groups__builds__remove

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the HTTP DELETE method, but does not disclose consequences (e.g., lost tester access) or reversibility beyond what annotations imply. It does not contradict annotations.

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 a single, clear sentence plus the endpoint placeholder. No redundant information or filler.

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 relationship-unlink operation, the combination of schema and annotations provides adequate context. However, the schema marks body as optional at the top level, and the description does not clarify whether a body is required to specify which builds to remove, which could confuse the agent.

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 meaningful descriptions: id is explained as coming from a list call, and body references the Apple schema. The description itself adds no additional parameter meaning, but the schema carries the load, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Unlink') and resource ('builds from a beta group'), and the HTTP DELETE endpoint clarifies the action. This clearly distinguishes it from the reverse operation (builds__beta_groups__remove) and the add counterpart.

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 use for unlinking builds from a beta group, and the 'ID from the matching list call' hint suggests a workflow. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over the reverse sibling (builds__beta_groups__remove) or provide any exclusions.

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