git-remove

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

The description correctly indicates the tool operates on the staging area, not the working directory. However, it does not explicitly state that the file remains in the working directory after removal, nor does it cover error conditions (e.g., file not staged). With no annotations, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 sentence that is precise and contains no superfluous information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core function.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior. It misses a minor detail about the file's persistence on disk, but overall is sufficient for a straightforward 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?

Both parameters have descriptive strings in the schema, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 (removes) and the specific resource (a specific file from the staging area). It distinguishes from sibling tools like git-remove-all (removes all files) and git-add (adds files to staging).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., git-remove-all for multiple files, git-reset to unstage) or any prerequisites. The agent is left to infer usage from the description alone.

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