remove_agent_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully handles behavioral disclosure. It explains the draft mechanism, the ability to stack changes via draft_id, and that it works across all tool types. It lacks detail on immediate side effects (e.g., live call impact) but is sufficient.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main action, draft workflow, and references a sibling for verification. It is complete for an agent to understand usage, though it omits return values (acceptable without output schema).

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter (e.g., name, draft_id). It reinforces the draft stacking concept but does not introduce new semantics.

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 states 'Remove a tool (by name) from a single_prompt agent' with the verb 'remove' and resource 'tool from agent'. It specifies applicability to any tool type, distinguishing it from siblings like 'add_agent_tool' and 'get_agent_prompt'.

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 explains the draft workflow for versioned agents and references 'get_agent_prompt' to verify current tools. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for batch removals).

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