Remove Document

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

Annotations already indicate the operation is non-destructive (destructiveHint: false) and idempotent (idempotentHint: true). The description adds valuable context that the document is 'hidden but can be recovered', which goes beyond the annotations. No contradiction found.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences with no redundant information. The key action is front-loaded, and the alternative tool is mentioned efficiently.

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 single-parameter soft-delete tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and key alternative. It could mention that the document remains recoverable via a restore tool, but the provided context is largely sufficient.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage for the only parameter, 'doc_id', and the description does not explain it. While the parameter name is self-explanatory, the description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation, leaving the agent to infer the parameter's meaning.

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 ('soft-delete a document') and resource, and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'vault_delete' for permanent deletion. It resolves the ambiguity of the title 'Remove Document' by specifying the non-destructive nature.

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 explicitly names 'vault_delete' as the alternative for permanent deletion, providing a clear when-not-to-use case. However, it does not mention when to use 'vault_doc_restore' for recovery, which would be a helpful additional guideline.

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