remove_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It states that the query is removed from disk, that scenes remain unaffected, and that a not_found status is returned for unknown slugs. This is strong behavioral coverage for a one-parameter destructive tool.

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?

Three tight sentences, no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by necessary sourcing and side-effect details. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the action, the slug source, the side effect, and the error case. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it 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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It does so by explaining that slug comes from save_query or list_queries and that an unmatched slug produces not_found. This gives the parameter semantic context beyond its bare string type.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a saved query by slug.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like save_query, list_queries, and show_query, leaving no ambiguity about the operation.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent where to obtain the required slug: 'Give the slug from save_query or list_queries.' It also clarifies a non-effect (scenes unaffected), which helps set correct expectations. It does not list explicit when-not-to-use cases, but no sibling tool performs the same deletion role.

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