ksp_flight_clear_maneuver_nodes

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that removal happens only after explicit confirmation (a behavioral trait), but does not state whether removal is reversible, what happens to active burns, or what the return value is. Partial disclosure.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence that front-loads the action, resource, and scope. 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?

For a simple destructive action on one boolean parameter with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential action but omits consequences (e.g., what 'native' means, irreversibility, effect on guidance). It's minimally viable but incomplete for a destructive tool.

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?

One required boolean parameter 'confirm' with 0% schema description coverage. The description mentions 'explicit confirmation' which hints at the confirm parameter's purpose, but does not explain what setting confirm=false does or any other semantics. Minimal added meaning.

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?

States a specific verb (Remove) and resource (all native KSP maneuver nodes) with clear scope. Distinguished from the sibling ksp_flight_maneuver_nodes (which presumably lists them) and ksp_flight_add_maneuver_node (which adds).

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 phrase 'after explicit confirmation' implies a safety-related usage context, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, nor are alternatives named. Adequate minimum but with gaps.

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