remove_document

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

With no annotations, the description adds key behavioral detail: 'the underlying file is never deleted' and specifies the return format. It does not cover idempotency or error states, but the most critical trait is disclosed.

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 sentences, no redundancy, front-loaded with the action and key constraint. Every word adds value.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and 0% param coverage, the description covers the essential purpose, key behavior, and return structure. It lacks error handling or prerequisites, but for a simple removal tool it is largely sufficient.

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%, so the description must compensate. It names the required parameters (connectionId, documentId) and indicates their role via 'by (connectionId, documentId)', but adds no additional detail about format or constraints, which is minimal for the context.

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 verb 'Remove' and the resource 'document registration', specifying it only removes the registration without deleting the file. It distinguishes from siblings like register_document by its inverse action.

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 (to remove a registration) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or context compared to siblings like list_connections or inspect_document.

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