Удалить ВН из списка

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only states the basic removal action without mentioning auth requirements, irreversibility, or what happens if the VN is not in the list. This is insufficient context for a mutating tool.

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 sentence with an active verb and direct object, with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool is simple with one parameter, so the description covers the basic operation, but with no annotations or output schema, it lacks details on side effects, auth, or error behavior. It is minimally adequate but incomplete for a destructive operation.

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 already documents the single vnId parameter with an example, achieving 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add much. The description's wording adds no further parameter nuance beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Удаляет' (removes) with the resource 'визуальную новеллу из списка пользователя', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_vn_to_list and update_vn_status. There is no ambiguity about what operation is performed.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool, but the purpose and sibling names imply it is for removing a VN from the user's list. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, only the action itself.

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