remove_place

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It warns 'WARNING: Destructive — the place and ALL arcs connected to it are deleted,' clearly disclosing the cascading deletion behavior. This adds value beyond the tool name, though additional details about network invariants or constraints would improve it.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence for the action, a clear warning, and an args section. Every piece of information is essential, and the structure is front-loaded with the main purpose, leaving no fluff.

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 (one parameter, destructive operation), the description covers the main functionality and parameter. An output schema exists, so return values are handled elsewhere. It lacks details about post-removal network state, but is largely complete for a basic deletion 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 description includes 'Args: place_id: ID of the place to remove,' which clarifies the parameter's role. Despite 0% schema coverage, this compensates by explaining what the ID refers to. More specifics (e.g., format) could be useful, but it's adequate.

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 a place and all its connected arcs from the Petri net.' This specifies the verb (remove), resource (place), and scope (including all connected arcs), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like remove_arc and remove_transition.

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 context that the tool deletes a place and its arcs, implying its use when complete removal of a place is intended. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, the warning and sibling list help an agent infer appropriate usage.

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