remove_particle_system

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

No annotations are provided, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond the action implied by the tool name. It does not disclose whether removal is destructive, irreversible, or if there are dependencies. The description essentially restates the name.

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 single sentence is concise and immediately front-loads the action and target. However, it lacks contextual details that would earn the highest score, but as far as word economy, it's efficient.

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 removal tool with two required parameters and no annotations, the description is minimal. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but the absence of usage context, prerequisites, and error conditions makes it insufficient for correct 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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate but only mentions 'by name', which hints at the 'name' parameter. The required 'object' parameter is entirely unexplained, leaving the agent unclear about how to specify which object contains the particle system.

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 the specific verb 'remove' and the resource 'particle system', and clarifies the selection method 'by name'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling particle system tools like add_particle_system or set_particle_property, though the inverse relationship is implied.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. For example, it doesn't state that the object must exist or that the particle system must be attached to the specified object.

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