batch_remove_strokes

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

The description indicates a mutation but provides no details on the scope extent (recursive?), what specific stroke properties are removed, or whether the operation is reversible. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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?

A single sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and to the point, earning its place.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks explanation of recursion, what constitutes 'strokes', and impact on other properties. It does not fully compensate for the missing annotations.

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 already describes nodeId as 'Root node' with 100% coverage, so the description adds only the notion of 'scope', which is implicit. This provides minimal added value, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 strokes) and the target (nodes in a scope), with the 'scope' implied by the root node parameter. It distinguishes from siblings like batch_remove_effects and set_stroke. However, it does not explicitly state that it removes strokes from all descendants, which would improve clarity.

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 like set_stroke or remove_all_effects. The description does not mention when not to use it or any prerequisites, leaving the agent without decision support.

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