Disassociate Equipment With Project (Project)

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's emphasis on permanence adds minimal new context. It does not disclose required permissions or side effects beyond deletion. The description aligns with annotations with 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 somewhat repetitive (e.g., 'permanently delete' and 'Permanently removes') and could be more concise. It front-loads the key purpose but contains redundant information.

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 explains the operation and required parameters, but lacks details about the expected response (e.g., success/error messages, return type) and any asynchronous behavior. Given no output schema, this missing information reduces completeness for an agent.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description merely lists required parameters without adding deeper semantics or usage examples. It does not clarify the format of 'ids' beyond what schema provides.

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 tool disassociates (permanently deletes) equipment records from a project. It uses specific verbs like 'permanently delete' and 'permanently removes', distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'associate_equipment_with_project_project' which adds equipment.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to permanently delete the specified Equipment records' and notes the action is irreversible. However, it does not compare with sibling tools like 'disassociate_equipment_with_project_company' or provide guidance on when to use this project-level variant over others.

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