remove_node

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

The description discloses the destructive nature (removal) and explicitly states that both incoming and outgoing connections are removed. However, it lacks details on reversibility, required permissions, or side effects beyond connections. With no annotations, it could be more comprehensive.

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 that efficiently conveys the core operation without superfluous words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description and schema together provide sufficient context. The explicit mention of connection removal adds value. Minor omission: no mention of error conditions or confirmations.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it merely repeats the purpose. No parameter-specific enhancements.

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 verb 'Remove', the resource 'node', and specifies the scope 'all its connections (both incoming and outgoing) from the terrain graph'. This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_node_details' or 'set_node_property'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_node_property' or 'get_node_details'. There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts for use, or when not to use it.

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