codebase_graph_remove

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

Without annotations, the description covers key behavior: waiting for in-flight builds and the option to rebuild. It does not detail permissions or side effects, but 'remove' implies destruction, which is adequately communicated.

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 efficient sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and no redundant information.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, notable behavior (waiting for builds), and post-removal options. Minor omission: does not explicitly state that the graph is deleted upon removal, but this is implied.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents the lone parameter ('projectPath'). The description adds no further detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool removes a project's persisted code graph and distinguishes it from siblings like codebase_graph_build (rebuild) and codebase_graph_status (status check).

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 implies when to use this tool (to remove a graph) and mentions that it waits for in-flight builds, providing context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like codebase_graph_visualize or codebase_graph_query.

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