remove_bookmark

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds valuable context by describing the confirmation message, the byte-by-byte audit report, and automatic rollback on XML parse failure. It could also clarify that the node itself is not deleted, but the provided behavioral detail is strong.

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 concise and well-structured with clear Args and Returns sections. Every line adds useful information, and there is no filler or redundancy.

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 mutation with an output schema, the description covers the core action, the return type, and an important rollback behavior. It is nearly complete, though it leaves minor ambiguities about edge cases such as removing a bookmark that does not exist.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. However, it only restates 'node_id: Node ID', which adds no meaning beyond the schema's integer type and title. No additional detail about constraints, lookup behavior, or failure conditions is provided.

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') and the resource ('a node from bookmarks'), which distinguishes it from deleting the node itself. It does not explicitly differentiate from delete_node or add_bookmark, but the phrase 'from bookmarks' provides reasonable 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?

The description implies the tool should be used when a node needs to be removed from bookmarks, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like add_bookmark or delete_node. Usage context is present but not fully developed.

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