remove_validator

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the delete action but does not mention side effects (e.g., index shifting, irreversible changes, validation errors on out-of-bounds index, or whether the operation is idempotent). This is a significant gap 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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. While extremely terse, it is appropriately sized for a simple delete operation, though it could benefit from a bit more structure for parameter 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 the simplicity of the operation and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not specify what 'x-validator' refers to, how to obtain the index, or any prerequisites (e.g., path validity). An agent would need to infer these from context, which is risky.

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 explain parameter meanings. It mentions 'index' but does not clarify that 'path' identifies the target component or that 'index' is the zero-based position of the validator. No extra semantics are added beyond the schema's property names.

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 specifies the verb 'delete' and the resource 'x-validator rule', with the method 'by index'. It distinguishes from siblings like set_validator (which adds/updates) and remove_reactions (different resource). The action and target are 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. It does not mention the context (e.g., which component or schema) or conditions under which removal is appropriate. Siblings like set_validator exist, but the description does not differentiate usage scenarios.

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