Detach an agent MCP server

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description directly contradicts the idempotent flag by stating the operation IS idempotent and returns detached:false rather than an error. Beyond annotations, it discloses the return shape of the edge case and the confirmation/credit-spend caution.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then adds idempotency and confirmation details. Two sentences plus a caution, all earning their place. Slightly longer than strictly necessary but no filler.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, idempotency edge case, confirmation requirement, and a safety caution about credits. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds value by clarifying the confirm parameter's semantics ('explicit confirmation... exact account operation') and implying the idempotent behavior of server_id. Baseline 3 is exceeded because the description reinforces key parameter intent.

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?

Specific verb (detach) and resource (MCP server/connector) with explicit scope ('from an agent'). Clear counterpart to sibling attach_agent_mcp_server and distinguishable from list_agent_mcp_servers.

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 confirmation requirement ('Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action') gives clear when-to-use guidance, and 'never resubmit unknown outcomes automatically' adds a caution. However, it doesn't explicitly name attach_agent_mcp_server as the inverse operation or spell out when detaching is appropriate.

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