Remove Saved Shows

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the batch ceiling of 50 items, which is useful operational context, but says nothing about permanence, behavior on IDs that were never saved, or partial-failure handling.

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 short blocks with the purpose front-loaded ahead of the argument note; nothing is padded. The 'Args:' block is slightly redundant with the schema but earns its place by adding format and limit detail.

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?

This is a low-complexity single-parameter mutation; the description covers purpose and the one argument's format and cap, annotations cover destructiveness and idempotency, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. Only error/partial-success semantics are left unspecified.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, and it does: it specifies that show_ids accepts either raw IDs or Spotify URIs and caps the batch at 50. The only gap is that array element format and error behavior on invalid IDs are not stated.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Remove podcast shows") and scopes it to "the user's library", which distinguishes it from remove_saved_albums, remove_saved_episodes and remove_tracks_from_playlist. It does not name the counterpart save_shows or get_saved_shows, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of the counterpart tools (save_shows, get_saved_shows, check_saved_shows), and no stated prerequisites such as required scopes. Usage is only inferable from the verb in the name.

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