cleanup_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'remove unused elements' but does not specify whether this is destructive, reversible, or what side effects occur (e.g., affecting document structure). The parameters hint at specific removals, but broader behavioral traits (e.g., safety, confirmation) are absent.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise, but it lacks substance that could be added without harming conciseness. It is front-loaded with the purpose, but the brevity leaves out useful details that would fit in a slightly longer description.

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?

Given the tool has four boolean parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is inadequate for an AI agent to fully understand behavior. It does not explain how multiple parameters interact, the order of operations, or the impact on the document, nor does it leverage sibling tool context for differentiation.

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 input schema covers all four parameters with individual descriptions (e.g., 'Remove unused styles'), achieving 100% schema_description_coverage. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's action ('clean up document') and the target ('remove unused elements'), indicating a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like delete_page_item or remove_item_from_group, which also remove elements, though the focus on 'unused' provides some distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., individual deletion tools) or when it should not be used. There are no usage examples, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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