unregister_kb

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the behavior when the kb_id is not registered (returns 'removed': false), which is useful. However, it omits details like whether removal is permanent, requires permissions, or has irreversible effects beyond the name.

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 sentence, immediately states the purpose, and includes the key return behavior. There is no wasted wording or redundant information.

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 simple one-parameter removal tool, the description adequately covers the core action and a key edge case (missing kb). It could mention side effects or prerequisites, but given no output schema and simple behavior, it is reasonably complete for the sibling context.

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. It adds minimal semantics by calling it a 'named knowledge base', implying kb_id is a name, but it doesn't explain the format, constraints, or how to find valid values. The description offers little beyond the raw schema.

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 ('named knowledge base from the registry'). It distinguishes from siblings like register_kb, list_kbs, and check_kb by specifying the unregister action.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to call unregister_kb instead of check_kb or register_kb. No context or exclusions are given.

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