remove_task_attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It explicitly states that the underlying file is not deleted, which is the key behavioral distinction. It does not cover error cases or permission requirements, but given the simplicity of the operation, this is sufficient.

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 two sentences plus a short example, with no redundant or generic content. It front-loads the core action and uses the example to illustrate usage.

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?

With two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, the main side-effect, and a usage example. It could add permission requirements or what the response looks like, but for this simple tool, the information is adequate.

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% with clear field names and descriptions in the schema. The description adds the context 'display name' and an example that maps the parameters to real values, but it doesn't significantly extend beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove'), identifies the resource ('attachment from a task'), and specifies the method ('by its display name'). It also distinguishes this from file deletion tools by clarifying that the underlying file is not deleted.

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 clearly states the attachment is removed but the underlying file persists, which helps an agent choose this over delete_file. It provides a concrete example showing the expected task context, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or exclusionary conditions.

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