remove_redirect_uri

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

Annotations are None, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action and required parameters, without disclosing side effects, irreversibility, idempotency, or error behavior. For a mutation tool, this is a notable gap.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundant wording. The purpose and required parameters are front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 two-parameter mutation, the description covers the essentials: action, parameters, and format. However, it lacks mention of success/failure responses, idempotency, or whether the URI must exist, which an agent might need to handle errors gracefully.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly defines both parameters: environmentId (with format hint env_<number>) and uri (the callback URL to remove). This adds meaning beyond the schema's pattern and format, though it could go slightly deeper on edge cases.

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 states a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('callback URL from the allowed redirect URIs list for an environment'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like add_redirect_uri and list_redirect_uris. The scope is unambiguous.

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 when to use it (when removing a redirect URI) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It provides no guidance on when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for a straightforward removal operation.

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