todo_remove

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load. It does disclose useful behavior: exactly one item is removed, keyed by id, and the updated list is returned. It says nothing about what happens if the id doesn't exist, whether the operation is reversible, or whether it errors or silently no-ops.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and scoped with the qualifier "one," then the return value. Nothing wasted.

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 the return-value note is a bonus rather than a necessity. The remaining gap is failure semantics for a destructive mutation with no annotations backing it up — an agent cannot tell whether a missing id throws or is ignored.

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 single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, but the description supplies its meaning ("by id") — the id selects which todo is removed. It does not say the id must refer to an existing todo or what a bad id does.

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 and resource ("Remove one todo from the scratchpad by id"), clearly distinct from the add/update/list siblings. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, 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?

Usage is implied: use it to delete a single todo identified by id. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, nor any mention of how it relates to todo_add, todo_update, or todo_list.

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