pmg_action_removeattachments_create

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses mutation type, dry-run behavior, confirm parameter, and config needs. However, it does not cover side effects, idempotency, or rate limits.

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 concise, front-loaded with purpose and mutation type, and each sentence adds distinct information. No redundant or irrelevant content.

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 7 parameters, no annotations, and presence of output schema, the description covers core purpose and behavior but lacks explanation for some parameters (info, proximo_target) and does not mention return values (though output schema exists). Adequate but not thorough.

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 coverage is low (14%). The description adds meaning for 4 of 7 parameters (name, text, all_, quarantine) explaining their purpose and mapping. It does not explain info or proximo_target, but overall adds significant value beyond 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 clearly states the tool creates a remove-attachments action object in the PMG RuleDB. The verb 'create' and resource are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like 'pmg_action_removeattachments_update' by specifying creation, but does not explicitly differentiate from other action creation tools.

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 for creating remove-attachments actions and notes dry-run default and confirm parameter. It mentions config requirements but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives or when not to use.

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