Remove chart indicator

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

The description is very brief and does not disclose behavioral details beyond what the annotations already imply. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, which suggests a mutation but not destructive, but the description does not clarify what happens to the chart state or whether the removal is reversible. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed.

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, front-loaded with the action. It has no wasted words and is easy to read. However, brevity comes at the cost of missing important details, but as a standalone sentence, it is efficiently structured.

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 might be minimally sufficient, but it lacks context about the chart state and how it interacts with other chart tools. Without annotations providing safety details, the description should offer more about the removal effect. It is not complete enough for an agent to invoke confidently.

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 only says 'by id', but the schema already defines 'id' as a string with length constraints. The description adds minimal value: it implies the id refers to an indicator, but does not explain how to obtain the id, its format, or its relationship to other chart elements.

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 'Remove an indicator by id.' clearly identifies the action (remove) and the resource (indicator), but it does not distinguish it from sibling tools like chart_remove_series or chart_remove_level, which also remove chart elements. The mention of 'by id' helps but is not enough to differentiate fully.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing indicator or the ID format. Sibling tools with similar removal functions are not referenced, so the agent cannot determine when to use this specific tool.

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