remove_worktree

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions force parameter and return format. Lacks details on irreversibility, side effects, or prerequisites for a destructive 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?

Description is well-structured with purpose, note, args, and returns. Two sentences are efficient, but could be shortened without losing clarity.

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 no annotations, description covers input and output but misses behavioral context like error conditions, cleanup requirements, or impact on repository state. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description adds meaning by naming and describing each parameter in Args section, but incorrectly states caller_agent_id as required while schema allows null. Provides basic semantics but incomplete.

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 explicitly states 'git worktreeを削除する' (delete git worktree), with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_worktree, list_worktrees, etc.

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 note '※ Owner と Admin のみ使用可能' provides a usage restriction but no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives or when not to use.

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