detach_proxy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this removes proxy links, modifies media files, is reversible, or what side effects occur. The agent gets no more information than the tool name itself provides.

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 short and free of redundant explanation, but the prefix 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is unnecessary filler. It is concise rather than informative, and the space could have been used for behavioral context.

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 has no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source of context. It fails to clarify what object the operation targets, what happens after detaching, or how this fits with related proxy workflows. The low complexity prevents a score of 1, but the description is still minimal.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema already fully documents the call signature. The description does not need to add parameter-level meaning, and no gaps exist for it to fill.

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 and resource ('detach proxy') making the tool's action clear. However, the phrase 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is generic and does not differentiate this from related proxy tools like has_proxy.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool, what prerequisite state is required (e.g., a clip with an attached proxy), or how it compares to alternatives such as has_proxy. The description merely restates the action without context.

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