uninstall_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions removing files and config references, which suggests destructive behavior, but lacks details on reversibility, required permissions, or side effects (e.g., project state changes). Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the core action, the second adds the details about what gets removed. No redundant or filler content.

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 there is no output schema, the description does not explain return values, which is acceptable for a destructive action. It covers the key aspects: scope (current project), target (all aik-managed files/config), and agent parameter. Could mention prerequisites or confirmation steps, but fairly complete for a focused tool.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (agent and projectDir). The description adds no extra meaning beyond these schema descriptions, aligning with the baseline score of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 verb 'Uninstall', the resource 'aik-installed content items', and the scope 'ALL' and 'from the current project'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'uninstall' (likely single item) through the explicit 'ALL' qualifier.

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 clarifies that it operates on the 'current project' and removes 'all aik-managed files and config references', providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives (e.g., for selective uninstall), though ALONE it implies a bulk operation.

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