detach_fieldgroup

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses key behaviors: it is safe (dry-run first) and requires confirmation. It does not cover potential side effects or reversibility, but the dry-run information is valuable.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and safety, with no unnecessary words. 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 no output schema and only 3 parameters, the description covers the main behavior adequately. However, it does not describe the dry-run preview's return format or error handling, which would be helpful.

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 reinforces that confirmed: true is needed for execution, adding context beyond the schema's default false. The fieldgroup_id parameter is described in the schema, and the description does not repeat that. Access_token is not explained.

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 removes a fieldgroup from the decisioning schema, with a specific verb (remove) and resource (fieldgroup). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_fieldgroup or list_schema_fieldgroups by focusing on removal.

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 explains that a dry-run preview always occurs and that confirmed: true is required for actual removal. This gives guidance on safe usage, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives.

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