delete_attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the action (delete an attachment) without addressing permanence, permissions, or side effects. As a destructive operation, this is a significant gap.

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 entire description is a single sentence with no redundant words, making it exceptionally concise and easily skimmable. It efficiently states the action and scope.

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 is minimal and relies on the schema for parameter details and an output schema for return values, but it does not compensate for the missing annotations by mentioning the destructive, irreversible nature of deletion or any required permissions. For a mutation tool with no annotations, this is a notable gap, though the core operation is clear.

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 already fully documents both parameters with descriptions (issue_key format and attachment_id source). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and identifies the resource 'attachment' with scope 'from an issue', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_entity_attachment and list_attachments. It is a precise statement of the tool's function.

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 the tool is for deleting issue attachments but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., delete_entity_attachment for entity attachments) or mention that list_attachments provides the attachment ID. No prerequisites or exclusions are provided, leaving usage guidance implicit.

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