vehicle_remove

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior (destructiveHint=true). The description adds the requirement for confirm=true, which is useful context, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like irreversibility or side effects.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that contains all necessary information without any 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?

Given the presence of an output schema and simple parameters, the description covers the essential behavioral requirement (confirm flag). It could mention that removal is permanent or that the vehicle must exist, but overall it is adequate.

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?

The description adds critical semantic value for the 'confirm' parameter, clarifying that it must be set to true for the tool to work. However, it provides no description for the 'vehicle_id' parameter, leaving partial coverage given 0% schema description coverage.

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 the specific verb 'despawn' and resource 'vehicle', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vehicle_spawn or vehicle_control.

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 usage for removing a vehicle but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusion cases.

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