remove_pack

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses admin-only authorization, the two-phase preview/confirm workflow, and the destructive removal scope. It does not fully disclose side effects or the role of the 'expected' parameter, but it provides meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 short, front-loaded sentences. It leads with the critical admin constraint and preview/confirm workflow, then states the action with no filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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 destructive admin tool with four undocumented parameters and no annotations, the description is too terse to support fully correct invocation. The preview/confirm flow is implied but the meaning of 'expected', the exact relationship between 'pack' and 'version', and what the preview returns are left for the agent to infer.

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 needed to compensate for all parameters. It vaguely maps to 'version' and 'confirm', and 'an id' likely refers to 'pack', but the required 'pack' value is never explicitly described and the important 'expected' parameter is entirely unexplained.

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 uses the specific verb 'Remove' and names the resource ('a shelf version' or 'all versions of an id'), making the core action clear. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like list_packs/get_pack, though it does not explicitly name an alternative or contrast itself with another removal tool.

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 gives clear contextual guidance: this is an Admin-only operation and the caller should preview before confirming. It does not name alternatives or explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the removal action is fairly unique among the siblings.

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