unload_library

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which cover safety. The description adds minimal context ('from the session') but does not elaborate on behavior such as idempotency or what happens if the library doesn't exist. With annotations present, the description meets the baseline but adds little beyond them.

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. It is front-loaded and all words contribute to meaning.

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 tool with one parameter fully described and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states the resource and action. It lacks details like effects of unloading a non-existent library or whether unloading is reversible, but given the simplicity and annotations, it's sufficient. A score of 4 reflects its adequacy without excess.

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 100%: the 'path' parameter is fully described as 'Path to library file or directory to unload'. The description repeats the parameter concept but adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'unload' with a clear resource 'library' and scope 'from the session'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like load_library (loading) and list_libraries (listing) by clearly stating the action of removing a previously loaded library.

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 phrase 'previously loaded' implies use after a library has been loaded, which gives clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. For a simple tool, this is adequate but slightly under explicit.

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