external.location_remove

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. 'Remove' implies mutation but fails to explain side effects, idempotency, error behavior for non-existent mappings, or authorization requirements. The minimal description leaves significant uncertainty 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 extremely concise (five words), but this comes at the cost of essential information. It lacks structure and fails to convey anything beyond the most basic intent. True conciseness would preserve clarity while being brief, whereas here brevity obscures necessary details.

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 has 2 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a rich sibling set, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what an 'external location mapping' is, what session context is needed, or what the result of removal looks like. The agent cannot reliably invoke this tool based on the current definition.

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 0%, meaning the schema itself provides no descriptions for the two parameters (session_id, source_address). The description adds no extra meaning, leaving the agent with no understanding of what these parameters represent or how to use them correctly.

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 uses a specific verb 'Remove' and a clear resource 'external location mapping', making the core purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like 'external.location_add' or 'external.library_remove', leaving ambiguity about what constitutes a location vs. a library.

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 alternatives, such as when a mapping should be removed vs. updated. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or related tools (e.g., external.location_add), leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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