detach_proxy

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

The description implies a destructive action but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether proxy files are deleted, if the action is reversible, or authorization needs). With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the action. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, with no unnecessary words.

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?

While the tool has only one parameter and no output schema, the description omits important context such as the result of the operation or post-conditions. It does not reference related tools like 'has_proxy' or 'manage_proxies' to aid completeness.

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 describes the only parameter ('item_id') with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 (detach/remove) and the resource (proxy from a project item), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'has_proxy' and 'manage_proxies'.

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, such as 'manage_proxies'. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., the item must have a proxy attached) or when not to use it.

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