abdm_remove

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

Annotations already establish destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds valuable beyond-annotation context: file deletion only happens with an explicit opt-in (ABDM_MCP_ALLOW_FILE_DELETION=true) and path verification. This helps an agent understand safety constraints and avoid accidental destructive calls.

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 compact sentences deliver the core purpose and a critical safety prerequisite with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the conditional deletion policy is stated immediately after.

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 cancellation tool with a destructive annotation and an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the main action, supports batch-style input via 'one or more', and discloses the file-deletion policy. It does not describe edge cases like cancellation of already-finished tasks, but annotations and output schema reduce the need for that detail.

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 carries the burden of explaining parameters. It helps by stating that one or more tasks can be removed, which maps to download_id accepting either a string or array, and it explains the conditional behavior of delete_file through the policy opt-in. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it does not explicitly name the parameters.

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 action ('Remove/cancel') on a specific resource ('one or more download tasks') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like abdm_pause, abdm_resume, and abdm_download. The optional file-deletion behavior is also mentioned, making the tool's scope clear.

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 the tool: when download tasks need to be removed or canceled. It also gives a policy condition for file deletion, but it does not explicitly compare this tool to alternatives such as abdm_pause or abdm_resume, nor state when removal should be preferred over pausing.

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