e2e_detach_volume

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: not whether the data on the volume survives the detach, whether the operation is idempotent, whether the node must be in a particular state, or what permissions are required. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a significant gap.

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?

A single sentence with the action front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 destructive-adjacent mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits everything an agent would need to act safely: side effects on the attached node, data retention, failure modes, and whether cleanup or retries are needed. The schema covers inputs, but the operation's behavior is unexplained.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (block_id, vm_id, location, project_id) are already documented in the schema, establishing the baseline of 3. The description adds no format, default, or scoping detail beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States a specific verb and resource combination ('Detach a block storage volume') plus the counterpart it acts on ('from a compute node'). This cleanly separates it from e2e_attach_volume and e2e_delete_volume, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to detach versus when to delete or re-attach a volume, no prerequisites (e.g., volume must be unmounted, node must be running), and no warnings about consequences. The agent must infer all usage context from the verb alone.

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