aya_memoria_grafo_remover

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

Annotaions already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds valuable context by stating that the operation also removes the entity's relationships, not just the entity itself. This clarifies the blast radius beyond what the annotations provide and does not contradict readOnlyHint=false or idempotentHint=true.

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 sentence with zero filler: it states the operation and its scope in a frontloaded way. Every word adds value and the description does not repeat the tool name or schema data.

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 one-parameter deletion tool with destructive and idempotent hints already provided by annotations, the description covers the essential effect: removing the entity and its relationships. It lacks usage guidance and explicit id semantics, but the core context needed to invoke the operation is present.

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?

The schema has one required 'id' parameter with zero description coverage, and the description does not clarify what 'id' refers to, its format, or its significance beyond naming the entity. The agent can guess that 'id' identifies the entity from context, but the description itself adds almost no parameter 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 is precise: it names a specific verb ('Remove') and an explicit resource ('entidade e suas relacoes'), distinguishing this tool from sibling graph operations such as upsert, observar, and relacionar. The scope is immediately clear.

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 instead of nearby alternatives like aya_memoria_grafo_upsert or aya_memoria_grafo_relacionar. The agent must infer context from the tool name and sibling list rather than from an explicit recommendation.

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