ruddur_detach_media_asset

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the server accepts media aliases (title/name, mimeType/contentType, etc.) and requires the media.manage scope. It does not contradict the annotations, and the added authorization and alias behavior are useful for correct invocation.

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 with no fluff. The first sentence states the action, the second provides alias behavior and scope requirements. Every clause adds distinct, non-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?

For a tool with no output schema and moderate annotations, the description covers the core action, alias flexibility, and required scope. It is slightly light on what happens after detach and how to choose between detach/delete, but the schema and sibling tool names fill most remaining gaps.

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?

Since the schema already documents all four parameters with descriptions, the baseline is 3. The description enhances this by explaining that natural Ruddur fields and aliases can be used, helping the agent know what to pass in body or path parameters despite the generic schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Detach a media asset from Ruddur content.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like attach_media_asset and delete_media_asset, and the alias/scope details reinforce the purpose.

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 implies usage through the verb 'detach' and adds a scope requirement, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus delete_media_asset or attach_media_asset. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, so guidance is mostly inferred.

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