remove_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden — and it discloses nothing. For a destructive operation it does not state whether the removal is permanent, whether it fails if the image is in use by a container, whether it is forced, or whether it requires specific permissions.

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 words are technically "concise", but here brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency — there is no front-loaded useful information at all.

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?

A destructive, zero-annotation, zero-schema-documentation tool with no output schema needs the description to explain target, irreversibility, and prerequisites. It explains none of them, leaving an agent unable to call it safely.

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 single parameter "id" has 0% schema description coverage and the description offers no clarification: not whether it accepts an image ID, name, or tag, and not the expected format. Nothing compensates for the documentation gap.

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?

"Remove image" restates the tool name and gives a verb+resource, but nothing more. In a sibling list containing remove_container, remove_network, remove_volume, delete_file and delete_website, the agent cannot tell whether "image" means a container image, a website asset, or something else, nor whether this is scoped to the current account.

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 tool, what must exist beforehand, or which alternatives exist (e.g. prune_containers vs remove_container vs this). The agent must infer everything from the name.

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