Remove media from an album

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating but non-destructive operation. The description adds the key behavioral detail that only album membership is affected, not the underlying media items. It also notes the per-call limit of 50, giving agents a concrete boundary beyond the schema's maxItems.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and then adding the crucial non-destructive guarantee and the batch limit. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or restated title content.

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, non-destructive mutation with well-documented parameters and helpful annotations, the description is nearly complete. It does not explain return values or error behavior, but no output schema exists and the operation is straightforward. This is adequate for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters including account behavior, album_id, and media_item_ids. The description adds little beyond the schema, but the 'up to 50 per call' phrasing slightly reinforces the batch limit. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 and resource: 'Take media items out of an album.' It immediately clarifies the non-destructive scope — items stay in the library — which distinguishes this from deletion-style tools like delete operations. The sibling and title context reinforce that this is the album-membership removal tool.

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 gives clear operational context: use this to remove media from an album while preserving them in the user's library. It implies when not to use it, but it does not explicitly name alternatives like add_to_album or state exclusion conditions.

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