Remove a media annotation

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description's mention of 'Remove' is consistent. It adds value by noting the return value (remaining count), but does not disclose other behavioral traits like irreversibility or required permissions beyond the annotations.

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 sentence followed by a brief return note. It is concise, front-loaded, and every word adds value.

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 destructive tool with 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no param descriptions, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the purpose of 'name' and 'project', nor does it specify behaviors like error handling or idempotency.

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 description only hints that 'id' is the annotation ID (from get_media), but does not explain the 'name' and 'project' parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving these parameters ambiguous.

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 resource (annotation from an asset), and how to specify it (by id from get_media). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like remove_media_comment or remove_attachment by focusing on annotations.

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 implies that the id should come from get_media, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like remove_attachment or remove_media_comment. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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