remove_ttl

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core operation (removes TTL) but does not disclose what happens if the key does not exist or has no TTL, whether the operation is destructive to the key's value, or what the return value/response is. For a mutating operation, this is a significant gap.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It contains no filler or redundant information, earning its place effectively. Brevity is appropriate for such a simple operation.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose but lacks important contextual details such as return behavior, error conditions, or interaction with TTL semantics. It is minimally complete but leaves open questions that an agent might need answered, especially without 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 description for the single parameter 'key' is complete: 'Redis key to remove TTL from'. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline 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 tool's action: 'Remove time to live from a key'. It uses a specific verb (remove) and resource (key), and the concept of TTL is unambiguous. This distinguishes it from siblings like set_ttl (which adds TTL) and delete_data (which removes the key itself).

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., key must exist, must already have a TTL) or scenarios where this is preferred over set_ttl or drop_key. The only implied usage is derived from the name and description, but no explicit context or exclusions are offered.

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