remove_doc_source

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. 'Remove' clearly indicates a deletion action, but it does not disclose whether the removal is reversible, if it cascades to related data, or if any confirmation is involved. This is acceptable for a simple operation but lacks extra context.

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 that immediately conveys the action. There is zero redundancy, and it is front-loaded with the verb. For a tool with one parameter, this level of conciseness is optimal.

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 simple removal tool with a well-documented schema and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete to convey core functionality. However, it lacks any note about side effects or post-conditions, which would make it more robust, especially as a mutation 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 one required parameter 'name' with the description 'Source name to remove', providing 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already specifies, so it receives the baseline score for high coverage.

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 action (Remove) and target (a registered source), using a specific verb and resource pair. This distinguishes it from siblings like add_doc_source (adds), refresh_doc_source (refreshes), and list_doc_sources (lists). No ambiguity remains about the tool's purpose.

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 implies usage when a source needs to be removed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. The context of 'registered' hints that the source must already exist, but this is not elaborated.

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