codebase_context_remove

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral detail: the tool is blocked during indexing and suggests remedies. It implies destructive action but does not elaborate on reversibility or required permissions. Overall, it is transparent enough for typical use.

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, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds a critical constraint. Highly efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Given low complexity (1 param, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential purpose and a key behavioral constraint. It could mention the expected outcome (e.g., success confirmation), but for a simple removal tool it is reasonably complete.

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 input schema already describes the single parameter (projectPath) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond referencing 'project,' so it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 clearly states the action: 'Remove all indexed context artifacts for a project from the vector database.' It specifies the verb (remove), resource (indexed context artifacts), and scope (for a project), distinguishing it from siblings like codebase_context_index or codebase_context_search.

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 provides guidance on when not to use the tool: 'Blocked while indexing is in progress' and suggests an alternative: 'use codebase_stop or wait for the operation to finish first.' This helps the agent choose appropriately, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other context removal tools.

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