Remove attachment

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

The description aligns with the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true) but adds no behavioral details beyond them. For example, it does not clarify if the operation is reversible or if it requires specific permissions.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise, though it could benefit from slightly more structure without becoming verbose.

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?

Given this is a destructive mutation tool with three required parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain return behavior, error conditions, or required state. It leaves significant gaps for safe invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage for its three parameters. The description only loosely relates to the 'attachment' parameter by mentioning 'file path or URL', but does not explain 'project' or 'ticket'. This leaves the agent to guess their meaning.

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) and the resource (file path or URL from a ticket). It uses a specific verb and distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'add_attachment'.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when or when not to use this tool versus alternatives. It merely states the function without context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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