bar_remove_from_shelf

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about whether removal is destructive or reversible, what happens to IDs not present on the shelf, or any permission requirements. A mutation tool this thin leaves the agent guessing about side effects.

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?

A single short sentence is appropriately front-loaded and free of padding, but its brevity here reflects under-specification rather than discipline. It neither wastes words nor earns them.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but a two-parameter mutation tool with zero annotation coverage and 0% schema descriptions needs more than one sentence. Key invocation details — required vs optional targeting and removal effects — are missing.

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 only loosely implies that 'ingredient_ids' are the items to remove. It adds no meaning for 'user_id' (including its default of 1), for whether the array is a full replacement or a partial removal, or for ordering/duplicate handling.

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 gives a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('ingredients from the shelf'), which clearly separates it from the sibling bar_add_to_shelf. It does not, however, name any sibling or scope qualifier, so an agent must infer the pairing from the surrounding tool list.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus bar_add_to_shelf, bar_get_shelf, or the shopping-list tools, nor any stated preconditions (e.g. the ingredient must already be on the shelf). Usage is only weakly implied by the shelf context.

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