remove_card_external_link

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 only states the action without mentioning side effects, such as whether the removal is permanent, if it cascades to dependent data, or if specific permissions are required. This is a significant gap for a removal tool, as an agent cannot anticipate the consequences.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the action. There is no unnecessary verbosity, and the core operation is front-loaded. It is well-structured and easily parseable for an agent.

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 simple removal tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks essential behavioral context. It does not mention the outcome of the operation, error cases, or any requirements. While the parameter schema is complete, an agent cannot fully anticipate the tool's behavior or preconditions from the description alone.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (card_id and link_id). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already conveys, so it does not compensate for or enhance parameter documentation. The baseline of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Remove' and the resource 'external link from a card', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_card_external_link and update_card_external_link. It is concise and unambiguous, though it does not elaborate on the nature of an external link.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, such as listing existing links first, nor does it clarify that this is the sole removal method. The agent must infer usage from the name and sibling context, which is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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