unlink_work_items

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotation that readOnlyHint=false: it explains that each child is unset from its current parent, the parent_work_item_id is not asserted, and dry_run is default. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise with three sentences. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds unique value: purpose, per-child behavior, dry_run default. No wasted words.

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 the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no nested objects, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: what the tool does, how it handles the parent parameter, and the dry_run mode. It is complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds additional meaning: parent_work_item_id is informational, dry_run default behavior and usage guidance, and the per-child nature of the operation. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 one or more work items from their current parent', which is a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'link_work_items' which performs the inverse operation.

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 provides clear context: it's a per-child operation, parent_work_item_id is informational, and dry_run defaults to true. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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