ncloud_detach_policy_from_sub_account

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

The description explicitly flags the operation as destructive and adds a critical behavioral detail—the need to set confirm=true to execute. This goes beyond the annotations (destructiveHint: true, idempotentHint: true) by explaining the confirmation mechanism, which is essential for safe invocation.

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, well-structured sentence with a clear warning prefix. It conveys the essential information (destructive, action, confirm requirement) without unnecessary words, making it highly efficient.

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 destructive tool with 3 parameters (no output schema), the description covers the core purpose and the critical confirm guardrail. It could mention potential side effects of detaching a policy, but given the schema covers all parameters, the description is sufficiently complete for this operation.

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 provides full descriptions for all three parameters (confirm, policyId, subAccountId) with 100% coverage. The description itself does not add parameter details beyond referencing confirm=true, which is already documented in the schema. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Remove an IAM policy from a sub account') with a specific verb (remove), resource (IAM policy), and target (sub account). This directly distinguishes it from siblings like ncloud_detach_policy_from_group and ncloud_attach_policy_to_sub_account.

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 provides clear context on when to use this tool: to remove an IAM policy from a sub account. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the wording makes the scope unambiguous relative to sibling tools that handle groups or attachments.

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