uninstall_apps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so richly: it flags DESTRUCTIVE, states that title data is deleted, that ShadowMountPlus-managed source folders/images are also removed, that the console rejects calls while a game runs, that removal completes asynchronously in the background, and that padd 1.3+ is required. Nothing behaviorally important is left implicit.

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?

Front-loaded with the DESTRUCTIVE warning, then ordered by operational importance (scope, cascade deletion, runtime precondition, async behavior, version requirement). Dense but every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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, no-annotation tool with no output schema and 0% param coverage, the description supplies safety, cascade effects, prerequisite sequencing, async semantics, and a compatibility floor. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and safely.

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 coverage is 0% for the single title_ids parameter, so the description must compensate. It does so by giving a literal example of the id array format (["PPSA01325"]), which is the key detail needed to call it, though it doesn't explain where ids come from or whether multiple ids are allowed.

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?

States a specific verb (uninstall) and resource (installed titles) and gives a concrete id example ("PPSA01325"), so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the inverse sibling 'install', so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

"Only uninstall what the user asked for by name" sets scope, and "The console refuses while a game is running; close_app first" names the sibling to call first as a prerequisite. Clear usage context, though no explicit when-not or alternative-selection reasoning.

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