machine_remove

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description adds critical behavior: instant clones will have the backing VM deleted, the confirm parameter controls preview vs. actual removal, and the operation is audited. This substantially exceeds what annotations alone convey.

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 well-structured: a one-line purpose with a warning, a two-sentence behavior summary, and a tight Args block. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: the action, the side effect on instant clones, the preview/confirm mechanism, and the source for machine IDs. The mention of 'Audited' also reassures the agent about logging, making this complete for safe 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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully documents all three parameters (machine_ids, confirm, target) with meaningful context: machine_ids come from machine_list, confirm acts as a safety switch, and target controls the Horizon environment. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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?

Description opens with '[WRITE] Remove machine(s) from their pool' – a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes it from sibling actions like machine_reset or machine_maintenance. The qualifier about instant clones deleting the backing VM adds precise scope.

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 states that confirm=False previews the blast radius and confirm=True removes, providing clear guidance on how to use the tool safely. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives like machine_reset, but the purpose and preview flow make the intended usage evident.

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