removeBookmark

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral context. It states the action is performed 'on behalf of the authenticated user,' hinting at authorization needs, but doesn't disclose side effects (e.g., irreversible deletion), rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the bookmark doesn't exist.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., idempotency, error handling), expected outcomes, or how it integrates with the broader system (e.g., sibling tools). The context signals indicate complexity (2 required parameters), but the description doesn't compensate adequately.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain the relationship between user_id and authentication). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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') and resource ('bookmark'), specifying it's done on behalf of the authenticated user. It distinguishes from siblings like 'deletePost' or 'unlikePost' by focusing on bookmarks, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'getUserBookmarks' (which is a read operation).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., the bookmark must exist), when not to use it, or how it relates to siblings like 'bookmarkPost' (for adding) or 'getUserBookmarks' (for listing).

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