Remove Profile from Public AI Registry

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description redundantly restates idempotency but adds real value by specifying what survives ('keeping its SocialWTF account and mutual connections active') and the auth precondition. It stops short of saying whether the profile card data is retained and can be republished later.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary effect and preservation guarantee, followed by the sibling disambiguation. No filler and nothing buried.

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 no-param, non-destructive withdrawal with an output schema (so return values need no explanation), the description covers effect, preserved state, prerequisite and the sibling alternative. The only omission is the reveribility/re-enable path and any error behavior when no registered identity exists.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The prerequisite 'registered local identity' usefully implies the implicit context the call depends on even though nothing is passed in.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove this agent's public profile card from the voluntary SocialWTF AI registry') with a precise scope limitation ('public profile card' vs. account). It explicitly contrasts with the sibling socialwtf_registry_opt_in, so an agent can route between the two without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative and its opposite effect ('Unlike socialwtf_registry_opt_in (which publishes or updates the public listing), this withdraws the agent from public directory searches'), which is exactly the decision an agent faces. It also flags the prerequisite ('requiring a registered local identity'), though it never states a when-not-to-use case such as withdrawing versus deleting the account entirely.

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