Unassign a floating IP

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key consequence – traffic to the address stops. However, it omits whether the IP is released or merely detached, whether the action is reversible, and any permission requirements, so it only partially covers the behavioral surface.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the constraint and its reason. Every clause earns its place with no 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?

For a service-affecting mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description conveys the core requirement and warning. It still leaves gaps about the resulting state of the IP and permission needs, making it adequate but not fully complete.

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%, so both id and confirm are already documented, establishing the baseline of 3. The description adds a rationale for confirm (traffic stops) but no format or syntax detail beyond the 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 names a specific verb (Unassign) and resource (floating IP) with scope (from its server), so an agent can distinguish it from cloud_assign_floating_ip and cloud_delete_floating_ip. It does not explicitly contrast itself against those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 states the confirm prerequisite but never says when to choose unassign versus deleting or reassigning the IP. No alternatives or exclusions are given, leaving selection to inference from the tool name alone.

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