pet_break_remove

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies mutation ('Remove') but lacks disclosure of side effects, permissions, or error behavior (e.g., what happens if checkpoint_id is invalid). The term 'breakpoint/watchpoint' introduces 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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is overly brief and lacks structured information. It meets a minimum standard for conciseness but sacrifices completeness.

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's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not clarify what 'checkpoint_id' refers to or how session affects behavior, leaving gaps for correct invocation.

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 2 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the purpose of 'session' or the meaning of 'checkpoint_id', leaving the agent without essential syntactic or semantic guidance.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Remove' and the resource 'breakpoint/watchpoint by id'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like pet_break_add (add) and pet_break_clear (clear all).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use remove vs. clear) or any prerequisites or context for invocation.

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