deregister_directory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the synchronous removed-file count return, the background chunk purge, the effect of keep_data, and the error behavior for unknown collections. This is substantive, non-obvious information beyond a simple 'deregisters' statement.

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 compact and front-loaded: objective first, then returns/behavior, then error semantics, then parameter definitions. Every sentence provides necessary operational detail with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool has moderate complexity—a mutation with asynchronous behavior, a conditional data-preservation flag, and a specific error mode. The description covers the main action, both parameters, return value, background processing, and error semantics. With an output schema present, no return-structure detail is missing.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates by defining each parameter: 'collection' as the collection to deregister, and 'keep_data' with its effect on LanceDB indexed data. Both parameters receive meaningful semantic context beyond their raw schema types.

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: 'stop tracking a directory', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from register_directory by its opposite meaning, and from delete by the keep_data vs purge distinction, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 opening 'Use to stop tracking a directory' provides clear usage context, and the keep_data=True vs purge option explains the decision branch. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or direct users to alternative tools like delete.

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