fabric_unassign_workspace_from_capacity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a mutation (unassignment) but does not disclose side effects, permissions required, or what 'capacity' entails. This lack of detail leaves the agent under-informed about behavioral traits.

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 with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded and immediately conveys the action. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about the concept of capacity, potential impacts, or constraints. Given the simplicity, a score of 3 reflects acceptable completeness with room for improvement.

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 100%, meaning the schema already documents the parameter adequately. The description adds no extra meaning or usage context beyond what the schema provides (e.g., default workspace value is already in the schema). Baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 'Unassign a workspace from its capacity' clearly states the verb (unassign), resource (workspace), and target (capacity). It directly contrasts with the sibling 'fabric_assign_workspace_to_capacity', making the purpose unambiguous.

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 when unassigning from capacity, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide prerequisites or conditions. The clear opposite sibling provides some implicit guidance, but explicit guidelines are absent.

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