remove_event

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that deletion targets a tagged fact selected by index, but omits what happens on out-of-range index or missing tag, and whether changes are persisted to the GEDCOM file.

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 tight sentence with no redundancy, and the delete action plus its selector are front-loaded. It is efficient, though it could afford one more sentence for disambiguation without becoming bloated.

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, and annotations cover the destructive nature. However, for a mutation tool with weak parameter coverage, the absence of usage routing and missing id/file semantics leaves gaps an agent would need to resolve elsewhere.

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 only 25%, so the description must compensate, yet it only implies the meaning of tag and index ('index-th fact with the given tag') and says nothing about the required id (whose @...@ pattern matters) or the file parameter. Two of four parameters remain effectively undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (a fact with a given tag at a given index, on an individual or family). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling set_event, but the destructive framing is clear enough to pick it over read/add tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus set_event or other mutation tools, and no prerequisites or warnings about deleting the wrong fact. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.

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