remove_client_optional_scope

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions 'remove' without detailing any side effects, required permissions, or whether the operation is undoable. The description carries the full burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits.

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?

A single, succinct sentence with no filler words. The action is front-loaded and every word is necessary.

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 minimal description is acceptable for a simple removal operation, but it lacks context about optional client scopes and does not reference the output or confirm the removal. Without annotations or output schema, the description is functional but not comprehensive.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, which are already clear.

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 action (remove), resource (optional client scope), and target (from a client). It distinguishes from siblings like remove_client_default_scope by specifying 'optional' client scope.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or alternatives; the purpose is implied by the name but lacks context about referring to the companion add_client_optional_scope tool.

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