Delete an attachment

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint/idempotentHint annotations by disclosing what actually gets destroyed (the ticket-file link is gone permanently) versus what survives (the file remains in the site's file manager), plus the confirm gate and the locked-state rejection rule. This is the kind of nuance annotations cannot express.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct load: what it does, the irreversibility nuance, and the prerequisites/preconditions. The destructive consequence is front-loaded rather than buried.

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?

For a destructive, no-output-schema tool this is complete: irreversibility, the confirm requirement, the preserved-file nuance, and the locked-state failure mode are all covered. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already documented in the schema, including confirm's const:true and the token/fileId/ticketId meanings. The description reinforces the confirm requirement but adds no new syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a file from a ticket') and implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling attach/download/list tools. An agent can identify exactly what this does without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear precondition (confirm must be set to true) and a negative case (closed or invalid tickets are locked and reject edits). It does not name an alternative tool for related operations, but the when/when-not conditions are explicit.

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