remove-effect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a destructive action ('remove') but does not clarify edge cases such as what happens if the effect is not found, or how removeAll interacts with other parameters. The permanence of the removal and any side effects are unstated.

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 unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it easy to scan and understand.

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?

The description provides a basic understanding of the tool's purpose but lacks details about parameter interactions and edge-case usage. For a 6-parameter tool, this is minimal but not seriously deficient given the complete schema descriptions. The absence of an output schema and the tool's straightforward nature keep the description acceptable.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal semantic value by distinguishing 'one specific effect' from 'all effects', but the schema already documents each parameter's meaning. The description does not go beyond the schema in explaining parameter choices.

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 clearly states the tool's function: removing one or all effects from a layer. The verb 'remove' and the resource 'effect' are specific and accurately reflect the tool's name, distinguishing it from sibling tools that add, apply, or list effects.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. However, the action is straightforward and implied: if you need to remove effects, use this tool. Additional guidance on when to use removeAll versus specifying an effect would improve clarity.

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