Unlink service

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable context beyond what annotations provide by specifying that the service loses access to environment variables and secret files, and by naming the API endpoint. No contradictions with annotations.

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 very concise: three sentences with no unnecessary words. The first sentence front-loads the core action 'Unlink service', followed by clear elaboration. Every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 required params, no output schema, annotations present), the description is complete. It explains the purpose, the effect, and the API call. An agent has enough information to invoke it 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It implicitly identifies the parameters via the phrase 'Unlink a particular service from a particular environment group', but does not explicitly describe each parameter (serviceId and envGroupId) or their formats. The parameter names are self-explanatory, so a 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 verb 'Unlink' and the specific resource 'service from environment group', and explains the consequence (loss of access to env vars and secret files). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'render_link_service_to_env_group' which performs the opposite action.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: to unlink a service from an env group. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, though the sibling list includes related deletion tools. Still, the purpose is evident enough for basic decision-making.

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