shortlist_remove

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only restates the action. It does not state whether removal is idempotent, what happens if the company is not in the shortlist, whether confirmation is needed, or what permissions apply — all material for a mutating 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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is appropriately sized, though it errs toward under-specification rather than verbosity.

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?

A return value is covered by the output schema, but for a mutation tool with zero annotations and an undocumented parameter, the description omits error behavior, idempotency, and preconditions. It is not complete enough for confident invocation.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter 'inn' has only a title, no description. The phrase 'компанию' weakly implies the parameter identifies a company, but the description never explains what INN is, its format, or that it must match an existing shortlist entry.

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 gives a specific verb and resource combination ('Убрать компанию из шорт-листа' — remove a company from the shortlist), which distinguishes it clearly from the add/show/export siblings. It does not explicitly name which sibling to use instead, but the action is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus shortlist_add, shortlist_show, or shortlist_export, and no stated preconditions. An agent must infer usage entirely from the name and the one-line purpose.

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