rig_skin_remove_bone

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by specifying that the bone's influence is removed from all vertices, which is a concrete behavioral consequence. It could mention undo behavior or error conditions, but the core side effect is clearly disclosed.

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 and front-loaded, presenting the core action and consequence in two short bilingual clauses. Every sentence adds useful information without fluff.

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 straightforward two-parameter destructive tool, the description plus schema cover the necessary information: what is removed, from what, and the side effect. It does not specify error behavior or return values, but those are not essential for this tool's core invocation.

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%, so both parameters are already documented. The description does not add deeper semantic detail about the parameters, but none is strictly needed since the schema fully explains 'bone' and 'objects'.

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 identifies the operation: removing a single bone from an object's Skin modifier, and explicitly states the consequence that the bone's influence on all vertices disappears. This distinguishes it from sibling operations like rig_skin_add_bone or rig_skin_set_weight.

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 makes the usage context clear: apply to an object that has a Skin modifier and remove a specified bone. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance, but the purpose is unambiguous and the optional objects parameter is documented in the schema.

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