remove_devices_from_group_bulk

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the critical FortiManager gotcha that DELETE on a non-member is a lenient no-op reporting success, and clarifies that requested_count is not a count of actual membership changes. It documents return keys and status values. Missing only any note on permissions or reversibility, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loads the one-line purpose, then organizes Args/Returns/Example cleanly. The Returns section is slightly verbose but the extra words on requested_count semantics are load-bearing; a small amount of terseness in args is the only minor cost.

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 mutation tool with no annotations but an output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains params, return shape, and the no-op success caveat. It stops short of covering failure modes (nonexistent group) and permission requirements, leaving minor gaps for a bulk mutation.

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 must compensate. It lists all four args, but three are near-tautological restatements (adom='ADOM name', group='Device group name', devices='List of device names to remove'). Only vdom adds real meaning by noting the default ('root') and that it is the VDOM the devices were added on.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+scope: remove multiple devices from a device group in one call. The 'multiple' and 'bulk' framing distinguishes it from the singular remove_device_from_group and the inverse add_devices_to_group_bulk siblings without ambiguity.

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?

'In one call' implies this is the batch path versus the singular remove_device_from_group, but the description never explicitly states when to use this versus that sibling, nor any preconditions (group must exist, devices must be in the ADOM/VDOM). Usage is implied rather than spelled out.

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