Clear Document Property

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the mutation profile is largely covered. The description adds useful scoping ('value from a document') but says nothing about what happens when the property is absent, whether clearing is reversible, or whether workspace context is required — all relevant for an openWorld, non-idempotent mutation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical clarifies the property parameter efficiently. It could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, an agent still lacks the sibling-routing information and workspace-scoping semantics needed to invoke this confidently alongside set_doc_property and delete_custom_property.

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 only 33%, and the description only reinforces the one parameter the schema already documents ('property by id or name'). Neither docId nor workspaceId is explained in the description, so it fails to compensate for the low schema coverage on a third of the inputs.

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 ('Remove') and a specific resource ('a custom property value from a document'), so an agent knows the operation without opening the schema. It does not, however, differentiate itself explicitly from siblings like set_doc_property or delete_custom_property, which sound closely related.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of set_doc_property, list_doc_properties, or delete_custom_property. The distinction between clearing a per-document value and deleting a property definition globally is left entirely to inference, which is a real risk given those siblings.

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