whitelist_remove

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the high-level effect and does not mention reversibility, authorization requirements, or behavior when the player is not already whitelisted.

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?

The description is a single, clear, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. This is excellent conciseness for a simple single-parameter command.

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?

The single parameter and lack of output schema make this a very simple tool, so the description is minimally adequate. However, the lack of behavior format details and no mention of how to verify removal leaves noticeable gaps for an agent in a broad tool context.

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 schema exposes a single 'player' string with zero description coverage. The tool description merely rephrases the action and does not clarify whether the value should be a Minecraft username, UUID, or case-sensitive identifier, nor gives examples.

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 'player from the whitelist', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like whitelist_add and whitelist_list, which correspond to opposite or listing actions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool relative to alternatives such as player_kick, player_ban, or player_pardon. There are no mentioned prereats, preconditions, or contextual examples.

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