tenki_detach_volume

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

Annotations already disclose that the operation is destructive (destructiveHint: true), not read-only, and not idempotent. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action, but it also does not contradict any annotations, so a neutral score is appropriate.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It could arguably be enriched, but for a simple tool it is appropriately concise.

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?

The description is functional for a simple 2-parameter operation, and annotations cover the destructive aspect. However, it omits any context about side effects, prerequisites, or what happens after unmounting, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding among volume-related operations.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both session_id and volume_id. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, 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 specific verb ('Unmount') with a clear resource ('a volume') and location ('from a sandbox session'). It plainly distinguishes the operation from sibling tools like tenki_attach_volume and tenki_delete_volume.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., volume must currently be attached), and no exclusion of cases where delete_volume or attach_volume would be more appropriate. The usage is implied only by the name and terse description.

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