profile_remove

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that open cursors are closed, which is useful, but it omits critical details for a destructive operation: permanence of removal, error behavior when the profile does not exist, or any permission requirements. The coverage is incomplete.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and the additional detail about cursor closure is placed in parentheses, preserving readability. It is appropriately sized for a simple operation.

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's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (which may describe return values), the description covers the core action and one side effect. However, it does not clarify the exact meaning of the 'name' parameter, error conditions, or any prerequisites, leaving gaps for an agent that must call it correctly.

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 only the parameter name 'name' with a string type and no description (0% coverage). The tool description does not mention the parameter at all, forcing the agent to infer that 'name' refers to the profile name. This is a minimal, non-explicit connection, leaving room for misinterpretation.

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 clear verb ('Remove') and a specific resource ('a connection profile'), which immediately distinguishes it from sibling tools like profile_add, profile_test, and profiles. The parenthetical about open cursors adds a unique detail that further clarifies the tool's specific function.

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 purpose implies when to use it (when a profile must be removed), but there is no explicit mention of alternatives or exclusions. Since no other sibling tool performs removal, the usage context is clear by inference, but the description does not explicitly state when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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