beta_testers__apps__remove

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description's 'Unlink' plus DELETE method aligns with these. However, the description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., that the beta tester itself is not deleted, or that the relationship removal may affect app access). It provides the endpoint, but that is not additional behavioral transparency beyond the 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, concise sentence that front-loads the action. The endpoint specification is also succinct and informative. Every word earns its place, with zero wasted content.

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?

Given the tool has a nested body parameter and is a destructive operation, the description is somewhat minimal but not inadequate. The schema fills in parameter details, and annotations cover the safety profile. It lacks a note about the scope of the removal (e.g., only the relationship is deleted), but for a straightforward relationship-removal tool, this is sufficient to function correctly.

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%, providing descriptions for both id and body. The tool description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter explanation.

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 'Unlink apps from a beta tester', which is a specific verb (unlink) with a resource pair (apps, beta tester). It also includes the exact DELETE endpoint, further disambiguating it from sibling tools like apps__beta_testers__remove or beta_testers__beta_groups__remove.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as builds__individual_testers__remove or beta_groups__beta_testers__remove exist, but the description does not distinguish when each should be used. It only states the action without contextual direction.

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