remove_my_profile_photo

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

Annotations already disclose that the operation is mutating (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false), so the description's statement of removal aligns with them. However, the description adds little beyond that—no mention of what happens when photo_id is omitted, no details on reversibility, and the '(v9.4)' suffix is irrelevant. The description is consistent with annotations but does not significantly enrich behavioral context.

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 brief and front-loaded, but the '(v9.4)' suffix is unnecessary noise. It does not waste many words, but it also does not earn every word since the version number adds no value. It is appropriately short, yet slightly under-specified.

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 simplicity of the tool, the description is minimal but leaves critical gaps: the meaning and behavior of the optional photo_id is unexplained, there is no return value information (no output schema), and there is no linkage to related tools like get_user_profile_photos for retrieving photo IDs. The description does not provide enough context for an agent to use the tool correctly in varied scenarios.

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 has one parameter (photo_id) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention it at all. There is no explanation of what photo_id refers to, whether it is required, or what happens if omitted. The description completely fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 action: 'Remove the bot's profile photo', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_my_profile_photo (which adds/updates) and remove_business_account_profile_photo (which targets a business account's photo). The verb 'remove' and resource 'bot's profile photo' are specific and unambiguous.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing the photo_id from get_user_profile_photos), and no context about the optional photo_id parameter. It simply states the action without situational or comparative advice.

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