Remove a step from a checklist

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly indicates mutation ('Remove', 'bump the checklist version') and adds an important non-obvious behavior: active runs keep the step they started with and ticked data is not rewritten. This is meaningful context beyond a simple 'remove' statement.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The core action and object are front-loaded, and the second sentence adds one valuable behavioral detail. Every word earns its place.

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 two-parameter mutation with fully documented schema, the description covers the essential operational behavior: what is removed, how the item is identified, the version effect, and the effect on in-flight runs. It does not describe the return value or irreversibility, but the operation is simple enough that these are minor gaps.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description's 'I01-style id' phrasing aligns with the schema's 'e.g. I03' example but adds no new semantic information beyond what is already in the input schema.

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 specific verb ('Remove'), a specific resource ('one step from a checklist'), and the mechanism ('by its I01-style id'). It also mentions the version bump side effect. This clearly distinguishes it from checklist_item_add and the other checklist tools.

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 intended usage is strongly implied: use it to remove a step from a checklist. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites or constraints beyond the description of the operation itself.

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