edb_remove_breakpoint

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

The description uses 'permanently remove' which aligns with destructiveHint=true annotation. It does not add behavioral details beyond what annotations and output schema (confirmation string) provide. No contradiction.

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 concise with a clear opening, a helpful tip, and a parameter block. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary text.

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 removal tool, the description covers the purpose, prerequisite (list breakpoints), and parameter. The output schema indicates a confirmation string, so no further info needed. Complete.

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 description includes a structured Args section that mirrors the input schema. Since the schema already documents the parameter (with description 'Breakpoint ID number'), the description adds no new meaning. Baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 ('Permanently remove a breakpoint or watchpoint by number') and distinguishes from sibling tools like edb_set_breakpoint or edb_disable_breakpoint by specifying 'remove' and recommending edb_list_breakpoints to find numbers.

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 advises using edb_list_breakpoints to find breakpoint numbers, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like temporarily disabling a breakpoint. Still, the context is clear and helpful.

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