arvan_detach_floating_ip

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description aligns with these traits but adds no extra behavioral context, such as prerequisites or effects. It relies entirely on annotations for behavior disclosure.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's action. No extraneous information is present, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 lacks context on how the floating IP is identified (implicitly via port?), prerequisites, or return behavior. Without output schema, the agent misses what to expect after detachment. The description is functional but not fully complete for informed selection.

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 0%, and the description does not explain what port_id or region mean beyond the generic schema. The phrase 'from the given port' hints at port_id's role but is insufficient for clear parameter understanding.

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 'Detach a floating IP from the given port' clearly states the action (detach), the resource (floating IP), and the target (port). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like arvan_attach_floating_ip and arvan_list_floating_ips.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied from the action, but no context or exclusions are given. Sibling tools are present but not referenced.

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