render_element_remove

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds little behavioral context beyond saying it removes an element; it does not mention irreversibility, failure behavior on invalid index/name, or that only render elements are affected. This is acceptable given annotations, but no extra value is added.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and covers both languages without unnecessary detail. Every sentence contributes the essential operation and target.

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 simple two-parameter tool with full schema coverage and destructive annotations, the description is sufficient. It conveys the operation and the available identifiers, and the sibling context clarifies the domain. It could mention needing an existing render element or listing first, but this is not a significant gap given the schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well documented. The description restates that removal can be by index or friendly name, mirroring the schema without adding new semantic detail such as precedence, edge cases, or how to discover valid values.

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 ('render element'), and the two identifying modes ('by index or by friendly name'). This distinguishes it from related siblings like render_element_add and render_element_set_output, making tool selection straightforward.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'remove' and the named parameters, but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention prerequisites such as listing existing render elements first. It is clear enough for a simple removal operation, but lacks explicit exclusion or prerequisite guidance.

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