foundry_remove_effect

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

The description aligns with the destructiveHint annotation by stating 'Remove'. It adds the qualifier 'active effect' and the two selection modes, but does not disclose irreversibility, required permissions, or behavior when both ID and status are provided. Annotation contradiction is absent.

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 directly states the action and options, with no wasted words.

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 five parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It omits the role of the required uuid, possible parameter combinations, and return/error behavior, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 phrase 'by ID or status' gives semantic meaning to effectId and statusId, which lack schema descriptions. However, the required uuid parameter is not explained, and user/client parameters are only described in the schema. At 40% schema coverage, the description only partially compensates.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('active effect') and specifies two selection modes ('by ID or status'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like foundry_add_effect or foundry_get_effects.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when to prefer effectId over statusId.

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