tdarr_remove_plugin_include

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, required permissions, or whether the operation is reversible. This leaves the agent uninformed about the tool's impact.

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, clear sentence with no superfluous words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the action and target.

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 absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation, the description conveys the core function. However, it lacks any mention of return values, error conditions, or post-removal behavior, which would be helpful for a complete understanding.

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 100% (both parameters have descriptions). The description adds no further details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already defines the parameters adequately.

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 (plugin from a classic plugin stack). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like tdarr_add_plugin_include and tdarr_update_plugin_include, but the term 'classic plugin stack' is somewhat vague, preventing a perfect score.

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 its alternatives (e.g., tdarr_update_plugin_include or tdarr_delete_plugin). There is no indication of prerequisites or conditions under which removal is appropriate.

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