Remove Zone

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, idempotent=true, openWorld=false, so safety is partly covered; the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: side effects on automations, the immovable 'home' zone, and an observed timeout/hang failure mode with retry and approval-timing guidance. This is well beyond what the structured fields provide.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the EXAMPLES/WARNING/NOTE blocks are scannable, but the closing Claude Desktop paragraph is long, capitalized, and tangential to selecting or invoking the tool. It dilutes an otherwise tight definition.

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 and annotations cover destructiveness, so the description only needs to add operational context it actually delivers: prerequisites, exclusions, side effects, and failure modes. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description goes slightly further by showing the identifier format via the example call ha_remove_zone("abc123") and telling the agent where to obtain the value (ha_get_zone()). It does not explain what happens if the ID is invalid or not found.

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 a Home Assistant zone"), so an agent immediately knows the operation. However, it never explicitly distinguishes itself from adjacent removal siblings (ha_remove_area_or_floor, ha_remove_entity, ha_remove_device), leaving that separation to be inferred from the name.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite (use ha_get_zone() to find the zone_id), an explicit exclusion (the 'home' zone cannot be removed because it lives in configuration.yaml), and a consequence warning that automations referencing the zone may fail. That covers when to use it, when not to, and the risk profile.

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