obs-remove-profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds valuable context about handling the current profile, which is a key behavioral trait not inferable from the schema alone. However, it lacks details on permissions needed, error conditions, or what happens if the profile doesn't exist, leaving gaps for a mutation tool.

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 two sentences with zero waste, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a critical behavioral note. Every word earns its place, making it efficient and easy to parse for an AI agent.

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 complexity as a mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is partially complete. It covers the main action and a key edge case but misses details like return values, error handling, or prerequisites. For a destructive operation, more context would improve completeness.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'profileName' fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning or examples beyond what the schema provides, such as format constraints or valid profile names, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without extra value.

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 verb ('Removes') and resource ('a profile'), making the purpose specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'obs-create-profile' and 'obs-set-current-profile' by focusing on deletion rather than creation or selection.

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 clear context for when to use this tool by explaining the behavior if the current profile is chosen ('it will change to a different profile first'), which helps guide usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings, such as 'obs-set-current-profile' for switching profiles without removal.

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