remove_queue_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It does disclose that the tool can optionally remove the item from the download client and blocklist the release. It does not mention the change_category or skip_redownload behaviors, but these are documented in the schema, so the description still provides meaningful behavioral context.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action, then adds optional behaviors in a natural order. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 that all five parameters are fully described in the input schema, the description only needs to provide the high-level intent and key side effects. It does that effectively, though it leaves some behavioral nuances (such as category change and redownload skipping) to the schema.

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%, with each parameter already explaining its purpose and defaults. The description adds a little extra clarity by explaining why blocklisting matters ('so it is not grabbed again'), but it does not substantially go beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Remove one item from the queue') with a specific resource and includes the optional side effects. The word 'one' also distinguishes it from the sibling remove_queue_items tool, making its scope immediately clear.

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 implies usage for removing a single queue item, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as remove_queue_items for batch removal. There is no named alternative or when-not-to-use guidance, so the usage context is only partially inferable.

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