remove_assets_from_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only says 'remove' without disclosing whether the removal is reversible, permanent, or whether any permissions or side effects apply. This is a bare description of the operation.

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?

One short sentence that states the verb, direct object, and scope with no filler. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description covers the essential action and the two parameters' roles, but since there is no output schema or annotations, it lacks information on return values, error behavior, or reversibility, leaving some operational gaps.

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 50%; asset_group_id has a description and asset_ids is self-explanatory. The description adds the bulk aspect ('many assets') and the target container types, but no additional constraints like batch limits or idempotency.

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 (many assets from a collection/lightbox/storage folder). It distinguishes from siblings like add_assets_to_group and remove_lightbox_membership_assets by specifying the bulk multi-type container nature.

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 bulk removal across multiple container types but does not explicitly say when to choose this over related tools such as remove_lightbox_membership_assets or how to handle prerequisites or caveats.

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