unlink_stanza

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses one negative behavior (does not edit role files) but omits side effects, permissions, reversibility, or what happens to associated resources. This is thin 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 two short sentences with no filler. Each sentence earns its place: the first states the core operation, the second clarifies a meaningful boundary. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description lacks enough context for reliable selection and invocation. There are no usage conditions, no parameter details, no side-effect disclosure, and no explanation of what 'project's map' means. The tool is left ambiguous among many stanza-related siblings.

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%, and the description adds no meaning for any of the three parameters: working_folder, project, and stanza_id. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Remove a stanza from a project's map.' The additional clause 'Does not edit role files' clarifies scope. However, 'map' is somewhat internal terminology and the tool is not explicitly distinguished from siblings like delete_stanza or uninstall_stanza.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as link_stanza, delete_stanza, or uninstall_stanza. The only hint is 'Does not edit role files,' which implies a boundary but does not state when this tool should be selected.

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