Remove ratings

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds valuable beyond-schema context by stating that watched status is kept, clarifying the boundary of what is removed. It does not describe permissions or failure behavior, so it is not a 5.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. The key action and the preserved state are both stated immediately.

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 low-complexity destructive mutation with rich annotations and full schema coverage, the description is mostly complete: it says what is removed and what is kept. It does not clarify behavior when both optional arrays are omitted or when only some items fail, which is a minor gap for a bulk destructive tool.

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 100%, so the parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning such as ID format, empty-array behavior, or whether arrays can be omitted. This matches the baseline of 3 when the schema carries parameter semantics.

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 verb and resource: remove user ratings for movies/shows. It also clarifies that watched status is preserved, which helps distinguish the effect from related state-changing tools. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as rate_media, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rate_media, unmark_watched, or get_ratings. The implied use case is clear from the name, but there are no exclusions or alternative-selection instructions.

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