github_code_security_detach_configuration

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

No annotations exist. The description only says 'detach', implying removal, but does not disclose if the operation is reversible, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. Critical behavioral context is missing.

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 terse (5 words). While concise, it sacrifices essential information; not every sentence earns its place as it provides minimal utility.

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 no output schema, few parameters, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about which configurations, prerequisites, and results. It is insufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 has 1 parameter 'org' with description 'org' (100% coverage). The description does not add meaningful context beyond the schema, meeting baseline for complete 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 states the action 'detach' and resource 'configurations' with target 'repositories'. It implicitly differentiates from 'attach_configuration' sibling via opposite verb. However, it fails to explicitly mention 'code security', leaving the type of configurations ambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to detach vs attach or update), nor any prerequisites or context provided.

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