x402_remove_service

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It clearly states the mutating action ('Remove'), which informs an agent that this is a write operation. However, it does not disclose reversibility, required permissions, or potential side effects on existing services, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the core action. However, the absence of annotations and lack of detail about permissions, reversibility, or effects on the allowlist leaves some contextual gaps for an agent.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, and the single parameter 'domain' is already well-described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, aligning with the baseline for high schema coverage.

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,' paired with a clear resource, 'a service from the approved allowlist.' This precisely distinguishes it from sibling tools like x402_approve_service and x402_list_approved_services.

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 clearly implies the tool is used when a service should be removed from the allowlist, providing adequate contextual guidance. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but for this simple tool the context is sufficiently clear.

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