detach-tag

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable context: it's v2-only (returns 501 on v1), and clarifies that neither resource nor tag are deleted. No contradiction with annotations; the description enhances transparency.

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 concise sentences cover the essential information: action, effect, idempotency, and API version constraint. No redundant or vague statements.

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?

The tool is simple with 3 parameters and no output schema. The description covers the key behavioral traits (idempotent, v2-only, non-destructive). It could mention the expected response (e.g., success indicator) but given the simplicity and annotations, it is reasonably 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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 3 parameters, so the description does not need to add much. The description does not elaborate on parameters beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 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 clearly states the action (detach a tag from a resource), specifies that only the association is removed (not the resource or tag), and distinguishes from siblings like attach-tag and delete-tag. The verb 'detach' and resource combination make 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 when to use this tool: to remove a tag-resource association without deleting the tag. It also notes idempotency and v2-only, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'delete-tag' (which deletes the tag) or 'attach-tag'. A clear usage context is present, though no explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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