remove_stars

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

It discloses important behavioral traits beyond the destructiveHint annotation: the operation is 'in place', it writes/respects checkpoints ('Checkpoints first'), and it can return NOT_INSTALLED when dependencies are absent. This gives an agent critical operational expectations.

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?

Three short sentences deliver substantive information with no filler. The main behavior, dependency caveat, and checkpoint requirement are all front-loaded and each sentence earns its place.

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 tool with 6 parameters, no output schema, and low schema documentation coverage, this description is too sparse to be fully actionable. It omits parameter meanings, success return behavior, and prerequisites beyond the checkpoint hint.

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 description coverage is only 33%, and the description does not compensate for the undocumented id, linear, unscreen, or stars_image parameters. It only indirectly hints at output behavior ('+ stars view') and checkpointing, leaving most parameter semantics unexplained.

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 states a specific operation: running StarXTerminator/StarNet2 to produce a starless view in place plus a stars view. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose and output, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like combine_stars or star_mask.

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?

It provides some usage context: 'Checkpoints first' and a NOT_INSTALLED caveat for this rig. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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