devicesUnbindDevice

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action is 'Unbind,' implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, if it's reversible, what happens to the device after unbinding, or error conditions. The description is minimal and lacks necessary context for a mutation tool.

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, direct sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, efficiently conveying the core action without unnecessary details.

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 the complexity of a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral traits, error handling, or what to expect after unbinding. For a tool that modifies system state, this is inadequate despite good conciseness.

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%, with both parameters ('fabricId' and 'nodeId') documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as clarifying what 'bound device' refers to or parameter relationships. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Unbind') and the resource ('the bound device from a node'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from the sibling 'devicesBindDevice' by being its inverse operation, though this distinction isn't explicitly stated in the description itself.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While 'devicesBindDevice' is a clear sibling, the description doesn't mention it or explain prerequisites like needing a bound device first. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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