pmg_ruledb_rule_from_detach

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation modifies rule configuration, is dry-run by default, requires confirm=True to execute, and needs PROXIMO_PMG_* configuration. It also notes that the change only affects mail flow if the rule is active. This is sufficient behavioral 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 concise with three sentences, front-loading the main purpose and mutation type. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values. It covers the operation, parameters, effect, prerequisites, and path. This is complete for a simple detach mutation.

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 schema has only 25% description coverage, but the description adds essential meaning for all parameters: id_ as rule ID, ogroup as numeric who-group ID, confirm as execution flag. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 verb 'detach' and the resource 'from (sender/who) group from a PMG RuleDB rule', distinguishing it from sibling tools like pmg_ruledb_rule_from_attach and pmg_ruledb_rule_from_list. It also labels it as a MUTATION (MEDIUM) operation.

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 by stating 'detach a from group' and contrasts with dry-run vs execute behavior, but does not explicitly specify when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives like attach or list. No exclusions or alternative contexts are provided.

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