remove_packages

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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true, and the description adds value by detailing the need for sudo, the behavior of dependencies and force flags, and the dangers of forced removal. No contradictions.

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?

Description is reasonably concise given the detail needed; front-loaded with purpose and tag, then examples. Could trim some redundancy but overall 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?

No output schema, but the description sufficiently explains the tool's behavior for a removal operation. It covers input flexibility, dependency handling, and safety warnings.

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 has 100% coverage, but the description adds concrete examples (e.g., 'packages='firefox', remove_dependencies=true → removes Firefox with its dependencies') and explains the pacman flags, which adds meaning beyond the 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?

Description clearly states this is a tool for removing packages on Arch Linux, with specific verb 'remove' and resource 'packages'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like install_package_secure, manage_groups, etc., by focusing solely on removal.

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?

Provides explicit context: 'Only works on Arch Linux', 'Requires sudo access', and examples showing different usage patterns. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the purpose is clear and no sibling tool does removal.

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