remove_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does communicate the destructive scope and that deletion is synchronous across multiple stores, but it does not mention whether the operation is irreversible, what happens if the document does not exist, or permission requirements.

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 one efficient, front-loaded sentence. It conveys the operation, the synchronous behavior, and the affected storage locations without waste.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and two required parameters, the description is not complete enough. It omits parameter semantics, safety caveats, and behavior in failure cases, though an output schema is present.

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%, and the description does not explain either parameter. 'kb' and 'doc_id' are left entirely to inference from their names, with no guidance on formats, relationships, or how to obtain valid values.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'delete a document' along with the concrete stores affected: qdrant, catalog, and disk. This clearly differentiates it from document retrieval/search tools and from KB-level deletes like delete_kb.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the name and the verb 'delete,' with no context about preparing for the operation or handling the irreversibility.

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