remove_network

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states two key behaviors: built-in networks cannot be removed, and if the removed network was active, the tool switches back to mainnet. This goes beyond the basic 'delete' action and helps the agent anticipate 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and no wasted words. The description efficiently covers purpose, a key restriction, and a behavioral consequence in a compact form.

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 simple tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It addresses the main action, the critical edge case (built-in networks), and a relevant fallback behavior (switching to mainnet), covering all necessary context.

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 schema fully documents the 'name' parameter (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that the name refers to a 'saved custom network' and that built-in names are invalid, which helps the agent select an appropriate value for the parameter.

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 resource ('saved custom network'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_network, switch_network, and list_networks. It also states what it cannot do (removing built-in networks), further clarifying its scope.

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 implicitly guides usage by restricting to custom networks and explicitly noting that built-in networks cannot be removed. While it doesn't name alternative tools, the context signals and siblings make it clear when to use this tool. The built-in network exclusion is a useful usage constraint.

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