remove_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose if removal is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what happens to dependent items, which is critical for a destructive operation.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and resource without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks critical context such as the permanence of removal, error handling, or return values, leaving significant gaps for safe agent invocation.

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 schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond implying removal targets tasks or projects, matching the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter semantics adequately.

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 action ('Remove') and the resource ('a task or project from OmniFocus'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'batch_remove_items' or 'edit_item', which prevents a perfect score.

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 versus alternatives like 'batch_remove_items' for multiple items or 'edit_item' for modifications. It also doesn't mention prerequisites or context for removal, leaving usage unclear.

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