remove_device

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a meaningful consequence ('It will no longer receive notifications'), indicating the tool affects the device's notification delivery. However, it does not mention reversibility, permissions, or whether the device record is fully deleted beyond notification removal.

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?

Two short sentences communicate the action and its key consequence with no filler. The essential information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient: it identifies the required input and the main effect. It lacks detail on errors, irreversibility, and return values, which would be useful for an agent handling failures or confirmation flows.

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%, and device_id is clearly documented as the ID of the device to remove. The description adds no parameter-level nuance, but the schema already handles parameter semantics fully, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clear verb and resource ('Remove a paired device') and states the direct consequence. It is distinguishable from siblings like pair_device and list_devices by its destructive intent, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pair_device or list_devices. There are no explicit context conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions; the intended use is only implied by the phrase 'paired device'.

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