Detach Domain

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

The annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-read-only. The description adds a more specific behavioral consequence—'Irreversible'—which goes beyond the generic destructive hint and helps an agent understand permanence before invoking it.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the core action and the most important consequence with no filler. The operation is front-loaded, and the irreversible warning is positioned immediately after it.

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?

For a simple detach/delete operation, the description plus fully documented schema give an agent enough to invoke the tool correctly: what it does, what IDs are required, and that it is irreversible. It does not explain return values or post-detach DNS behavior, but those are not essential for a straightforward mutation without an output schema.

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 documents all three parameters with 100% coverage, including the helpful note that mappingId comes from list_domains. The description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so the schema carries this dimension.

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 a specific verb ('Detach') and clearly identifies the resource ('custom domain') and the object it is removed from ('a Cube'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling domain tools like create_domain, update_domain, and list_domains.

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 intended use is implied: call this when you want to detach a custom domain from a Cube. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives such as update_domain for changing domain settings instead of removing the mapping.

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